New Delhi : Supreme Court on Friday recalled its August 4 order directing that a judge of the Allahabad High Court be removed from hearing criminal matters until retirement and be made to sit with a senior judge. The bench of Justices J B Pardiwala and R Mahadevan had issued the directive after expressing concerns over an order by Justice Prashant Kumar, who had refused to quash a criminal complaint.
The recall followed a request from Chief Justice of India B R Gavai, who asked the bench to reconsider the limitations imposed on the High Court judge amid widespread criticism of the original order. The case was relisted for fresh directions. We have received an undated letter from the hon’ble Chief Justice of India requesting the reconsideration of the observations in paras. In such circumstances, we directed the Registry to re-notify the main matter for considering the request made by the Chief Justice of India, Justice Pardiwala said while explaining the reasons for re-listing.
Thirteen High Court judges wrote to the Chief Justice of the Allahabad High Court, urging him not to implement the Supreme Court’s earlier directions. Justice Pardiwala said that there was no intention to embarrass or disparage the judge. We must clarify that our intention was not to cause embarrassment or cast aspersions on the concerned Judge. We would not even think of doing so. However, when the matters cross a threshold and the dignity of the institution is imperilled, it becomes the constitutional responsibility of this Court to intervene even when acting under its appellate jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution,” Justice Pardiwala said.
The bench clarified that the Supreme Court’s goal was to uphold the judiciary’s dignity without interfering with the administrative powers of the High Court. It stressed that High Courts are integral to the judicial system, not separate from it. We hereby delete paragraphs 25 and 26 of our August 4 order and leave it to the Chief Justice of the High Court to take an appropriate view, the bench said, affirming the Chief Justice’s authority over case allocation.
-
-
-
-
