The Allahabad High Court recently allowed an application filed by a Judicial Officer praying for deletion of remarks made by the Session Judge, Hardoi who was hearing an appeal to the judgment authored by the applicant.
The Bench of Justice Alok Mathur was hearing an application filed by a Judicial Magistrate who has prayed before the Court to quash the remarks made against him by the Sessions Judge, Hardoi while setting aside his judgment in a Criminal Case No. 909/2019 [State v. Yamohan Singh].
The Sessions Judge has made the following remarks:
“विद्वान मजिस्ट्रेट ने बिना साक्ष्य का विश्लेषण किये हुए अपीलार्थी/अभियुक्त के विरुद्ध आरोप सिद्ध होने का जो निष्कर्ष निकाला है वह त्रुटिपूर्ण है । यहां यह उल्लेखनीय है कि विद्वान मजिस्ट्रेट के द्वारा जो निर्णय लिखा गया है , उसमे अभियोजन केस के उपरांत उस साक्ष्य का वर्णय किया गया है जो अभियोजन ने प्रस्तुत किया है, जिसमे सभी साक्षियों की मुख्य परीक्षा व प्रतिपरीक्षा के बयान उसी रूप में उतार लिये गए है और फिर उसके बाद बिना साक्ष्य का कोई विश्लेषण किये हुए विद्वान मजिस्ट्रेट सीधे निष्कर्ष पर आ गए है और यह निष्कर्ष दे दिया है कि अभियोजन साक्ष्य से अभियुक्त के विरुद्ध धारा 406, 411 भा0दं0सं0 के आरोप सिद्ध हो रहे है। अपर मुख्य मजिस्ट्रेट स्तर के न्यायिक अधिकारी से ऐसे निर्णय की अपेक्षा नही की जा सकती है। विद्वान मजिस्ट्रेट से निर्णय लेखन सुधार अपेक्षित है।”
The Bench while examining the case has relied on certain observations made by the Supreme Court where the highest court has cautioned the High Courts to refrain from making observations extending to criticism of the subordinate judicial officer.
The Bench while allowing the application moved by the applicant has observed that:
“The Sessions Judge while hearing the appeal had full powers and jurisdiction at his command to re-appreciate the evidence to disagree and come to a different conclusion that of the trial Court; but his jurisdiction fell short of commenting upon the shortcomings of the applicant while discharging the duties of trial Court dealing with the said case. It was not expected from him to demonstrate that the applicant while discharging his duties of a trial Judge had not written the judgment as expected from the judicial officer.”
The Court while allowing deletion of the remarks and observations made against the applicant in the judgment passed by the Sessions Judge, Hardoi has observed that:
“There was absolutely no occasion or any need to make any comments upon the applicant and in case he felt strongly about the shortcomings of the applicant, then it was always open for him to inform his Administrative Judge or the Hon’ble Chief Justice.”
The applicant was represented by Advocate Pradeep Kumar Sai assisted by Advocate Prakarsh Pandey, Advocate Devansh Mishra, Advocate Praveen Kumar Shukla and Advocate Priyansu Singh.
Click here to Download the Order
Reported by Anadi Tiwari.