Don`t discredit judges in public eye, SC to courts
The Supreme Court has cautioned courts from passing disparaging remarks against subordinate judges as it will lower the image of the judiciary in the eyes of the public besides affecting their career.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court has cautioned
courts from passing disparaging remarks against subordinate
judges as it will lower the image of the judiciary in the
eyes of the public besides affecting their career.
"Using intemperate language and casting strictures on the
judges of the lower judiciary diminishes the image of
judiciary in the eyes of public," the apex court said citing
its earlier directions.
A Bench of Justices G S Singhvi and C K Prasad quashed
the observations made by the Andhra Pradesh High Court against
the Principal District Judge, Kadapa, after the the judge
moved the apex court for expunging the remarks.
The High Court had made certain disparaging remarks in a
judgement dated June 25, 2009 against the judge while setting
aside an injunction order passed by him in a land dispute.
"The Division Bench of the High Court may be fully
justified in setting aside the order of injunction, but there
was absolutely no justification for the Division Bench to make
highly disparaging remarks against the appellant as a judicial
officer casting doubts on his ability to decide the cases
"The use of the words `out of sheer arrogance and
disrespect to the lawful order` and the expression `judicial
authoritarianism` in paragraph 10 shows that the Division
Bench ignored the words of caution administered by this court
in several judgements," the apex court said.
The Bench said the High Court had no justification for
castigating the judge as it would lower his image in public.
"The observations and remarks made by the Division Bench
of the High Court are bound to adversely affect the image of
the appellant in the eyes of the public, his credibility as a
judicial officer and also affects his career.
"We are sure that if the Division Bench of the High Court
had kept in view the judgements of this court, it would not
have made disparaging remarks against the appellant, which, in
the facts and circumstances of the case, were not at all
called for," it said while expunging the remarks.