Supreme Court Warns High Courts Against Adverse Remarks on District Judges
The Supreme Court of India has issued a stern warning to High Courts regarding the growing trend of passing disparaging remarks and strictures against district judicial officers. This directive emerged during the hearing of an appeal challenging a Calcutta High Court order that cancelled an accused person's bail nearly eight years after it was granted, citing procedural and technical grounds. Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta declared the cancellation legally unsustainable due to the significant time lapse. The bench emphasized that High Courts, acting as guardians of the district judiciary under Article 227 of the Constitution, should use their supervisory powers to nurture and guide lower court judges rather than oppress them. The Court noted that such adverse observations can severely damage the careers of judicial officers and demoralize the entire district judiciary. Instead of immediate castigation, the Supreme Court suggested utilizing in-house mechanisms to address flaws in trial court orders. This ruling aims to protect the morale and integrity of subordinate judicial services while ensuring that appellate jurisdiction is exercised constructively.
Wire timeline
Supreme Court Warns High Courts Against Adverse Remarks on District Judges
The Supreme Court of India has issued a stern warning to High Courts regarding the growing trend of passing disparaging remarks and strictures against district judicial officers. This directive emerged during the hearing of an appeal challenging a Calcutta High Court order that cancelled an accused person's bail nearly eight years after it was granted, citing procedural and technical grounds. Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta declared the cancellation legally unsustainable due to the significant time lapse. The bench emphasized that High Courts, acting as guardians of the district judiciary under Article 227 of the Constitution, should use their supervisory powers to nurture and guide lower court judges rather than oppress them. The Court noted that such adverse observations can severely damage the careers of judicial officers and demoralize the entire district judiciary. Instead of immediate castigation, the Supreme Court suggested utilizing in-house mechanisms to address flaws in trial court orders. This ruling aims to protect the morale and integrity of subordinate judicial services while ensuring that appellate jurisdiction is exercised constructively.
The Indian Express