Supreme Court Warns High Courts Against Criticizing Trial Judges
The Supreme Court has issued a stern warning to High Courts regarding an increasing trend of publicly criticizing subordinate judicial officers. The apex court emphasized that High Courts are expected to act as protectors of judicial officers belonging to the district judiciary, rather than engaging in their public condemnation. A bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta made these observations while overturning a Calcutta High Court order that had cancelled an accused's bail in a criminal case primarily related to a rent dispute. The Supreme Court found the High Court's decision to cancel bail on technical grounds after eight years unjustified, given the largely civil nature of the dispute.
The Supreme Court highlighted a recent disturbing trend where High Courts, while exercising supervisory, appellate, or revisional jurisdiction, issue judicial orders containing abusive language and adverse or strict remarks against judicial officers. The court stated that even when defects are found in an order passed by a judicial officer, the immediate response should not involve making adverse or derogatory comments. Such disparaging statements or strictures can not only demoralize the district judiciary but also severely damage a judicial officer's career.
The bench further clarified that the supervisory power granted to High Courts under Article 227 of the Constitution should not be utilized as a tool of oppression. Instead, it should serve as a mechanism to foster and guide judicial officers within the state. The Supreme Court also noted that several High Courts already have internal procedures in place to address such issues, where observations regarding the merit or quality of a trial court's order or its functioning can be recorded in a note slip and presented to an administrative judge or the Chief Justice for appropriate administrative action, rather than public reprimand in judicial orders.
Source: CourtBeat News (Kannada)
