High Court's reprimands against judicial officer temporarily halted by Supreme Court
The Supreme Court of India has taken notice of an appeal filed by a concerned judge, who is aggrieved by the adverse remarks made by the Rajasthan High Court. The top court has proceeded to stay the High Court judgment and the operation of the order, following the petition filed by advocate Meenakshi Lekhi.
The case in question stems from a First Information Report (FIR) registered in Jaisalmer involving offences under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO Act). Two separate trials were conducted on the basis of the same FIR and overlapping evidence.
The petition highlighted the judge's dedication to discharging judicial functions, disposing of cases required under the POCSO Act at a required pace. However, the High Court observed that the trial judge had effectively shirked judicial responsibility and had resorted to a "cut, copy, paste methodology." Large portions of the reasoning in the judgment against a juvenile were found to be identical to the passages appearing in the judgment against a co-accused.
The judge, on the other hand, argued that the adverse remarks were unduly harsh due to inadvertent clerical errors with no impact on the substance of the judgment. Minor clerical errors, such as an incorrect serial number of a prosecution witness, were acknowledged in the petition. The judge emphasised their commitment to ensuring justice and upholding the integrity of the judiciary.
Senior Advocate Siddhartha Dave and advocates Javed Khan, Vanya Gupta, Shrey Kapoor, and Tanisha Kaushal appeared for the petitioner. The case is being heard by a bench comprising Justice JK Maheshwari and Justice Vijay Bishnoi.
Notably, the High Court had directed Rajasthan Judicial Academy to impart training to the judge in judgment writing. The High Court, in refusing suspension of sentence, upheld the conviction but did not find any illegality on merits. The Supreme Court has yet to deliver its final verdict on the matter.
In its Friday order, the Supreme Court stayed the High Court judgment and the adverse observations made against the judge under the POCSO Act. The court will continue to hear the case at a later date.
