The High Court of J&K and Ladakh has cautioned litigants and lawyers against making unfounded and scandalous allegations against judicial officers, saying any such conduct without any basis shall invite appropriate action in accordance with law.
While hearing a transfer petition by Assadullah Bhat and others, a Bench of Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal observed that the “petitioners have levelled scandalous and unsubstantiated allegations without any proof against two presiding officers– a Sub-Judge and Principal District Judge.
When counsel for petitioners was confronted with the averments contained in the transfer petition, he was unable to substantiate the same even at the threshold, the court observed. While the counsel sought leave to withdraw the petition unconditionally, the court declined to grant such leave.
“Permitting such a course would amount to allowing them to escape the consequences of making reckless, scandalous, and unsubstantiated allegations, which is wholly impermissible in law,” the court said.
“While this Court is constitutionally vested with supervisory jurisdiction over the district judiciary, it bears a corresponding obligation to protect its judicial officers from scandalous, reckless, and wholly unsubstantiated allegations,” the court said. The exercise of such supervisory control could not be reduced to a conduit for ventilating grievances founded on conjecture or motivated insinuation, it added.
“Any indulgence of baseless imputations would not only strike at the very root of judicial independence but also corrode institutional integrity and erode public confidence in the administration of justice,” the Court said in response to the plea.
Judicial officers cannot be expected to discharge their duties with the requisite independence, impartiality, and fearlessness if they are compelled to function under the constant spectre of unfounded aspersions upon their character and conduct, the court said.
“To permit such allegations to gain publicity, in the absence of cogent and credible material, would have a chilling effect on the judicial process and imperil the dignity of the institution itself,” the court said while issuing a “clear and unequivocal caution to all litigants and members of the Bar to desist from making such unfounded and scandalous allegations against judicial officers”.
The Court noted that such allegations, by their very nature, are not directed against an individual Judge in his or her personal capacity, but constitute an affront to the dignity, independence, and institutional integrity of the judiciary. “The sanctity of judicial proceedings cannot be permitted to be sullied by reckless pleadings which, under the guise of advocacy, seek to malign the judicial process,” it said.
“While this Court is constitutionally vested with supervisory jurisdiction over the district judiciary, it bears a corresponding obligation to protect its judicial officers from scandalous, reckless, and wholly unsubstantiated allegations”
Observing that since the petitioners have levelled scandalous allegations without any basis and corroboration, the Court deemed it proper, at the first instance, to direct them to file an unconditional apology also “showing genuine remorse for such allegations with a clear undertaking that they shall remain cautious in future”.
“Let affidavits tendering unconditional apology be filed separately by all the petitioners before this Court within a period of one week,” the court said. The Court also cautioned the petitioners’ counsel, saying that the pleadings must be drafted with due responsibility and supported by material.
About The Author
