By PTI
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Monday advised the Patna High Court to “drop” disciplinary proceedings against a Bihar judicial officer, who has challenged his suspension by the high court presumably over extra-quick delivery of justice.
A bench of Justices U U Lalit and S R Bhat was hearing a petition filed by Shashi Kant Rai, an additional district and sessions judge (ADJ) in Araria.
“Our sincere advise is, drop everything,” the bench told the counsel appearing for the high court.
“If you do not want to drop, we will go threadbare into it,” observed the bench, adding that it sends a “bad message” to others.
“Don’t drive it to such lengths where the future and prospects of a judicial officer come under a cloud and then it becomes completely embarrassing for the institution as such,” it said.
Rai has said in his plea that he “reasonably believes” there is an “institutional bias” against him as he concluded the trial in a POCSO case involving the rape of a six-year-old girl in a single day.
In another case, he awarded capital punishment to an accused in four working days of trial, the plea said, adding, these verdicts were widely reported and appreciated by the government and public.
The apex court observed that it has been brought to its notice that after the matter was dealt with by it on July 29, a memorandum dated August 5 containing articles of charge has been served upon the petitioner.
It noted that the memorandum called upon the petitioner to submit his statement of defence within 10 days of the receipt of the memo.
Senior advocate Vikas Singh, appearing for Rai, submitted that without prejudice to all the submissions and contentions, the petitioner is willing to submit his statement in response to the memorandum The bench said let the needful be done on or before August 15.
Advocate Gaurav Agrawal, appearing for the high court, told the bench that an appropriate decision after considering the matter in entirety, including the response so filed by the petitioner, shall be taken within two days thereafter.
The bench has listed the matter for further consideration on August 18.
The plea has alleged that the “non-speaking” order of February 8, 2022 passed by the high court keeping the petitioner under suspension with immediate effect is “manifestly arbitrary and violates the principles of natural justice”.
“There is no reliance placed on any material while arriving at the said decision. The order merely states that disciplinary proceedings are pending against the petitioner and therefore, in exercise of the powers under Sub-rule (1) of Rule 6 of the Bihar Judicial Service (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 2020 places the petitioner under suspension,” it said.
The plea claimed the petitioner had only sought consideration for restoration of his seniority on the basis of a new evaluation system introduced by the high court, which first issued show cause notice and later suspended him without giving any reasons, merely for questioning the process of evaluation of judgements.
The petitioner had joined the Bihar Judicial Services in 2007.
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Monday advised the Patna High Court to “drop” disciplinary proceedings against a Bihar judicial officer, who has challenged his suspension by the high court presumably over extra-quick delivery of justice.
A bench of Justices U U Lalit and S R Bhat was hearing a petition filed by Shashi Kant Rai, an additional district and sessions judge (ADJ) in Araria.
“Our sincere advise is, drop everything,” the bench told the counsel appearing for the high court.
“If you do not want to drop, we will go threadbare into it,” observed the bench, adding that it sends a “bad message” to others.
“Don’t drive it to such lengths where the future and prospects of a judicial officer come under a cloud and then it becomes completely embarrassing for the institution as such,” it said.
Rai has said in his plea that he “reasonably believes” there is an “institutional bias” against him as he concluded the trial in a POCSO case involving the rape of a six-year-old girl in a single day.
In another case, he awarded capital punishment to an accused in four working days of trial, the plea said, adding, these verdicts were widely reported and appreciated by the government and public.
The apex court observed that it has been brought to its notice that after the matter was dealt with by it on July 29, a memorandum dated August 5 containing articles of charge has been served upon the petitioner.
It noted that the memorandum called upon the petitioner to submit his statement of defence within 10 days of the receipt of the memo.
Senior advocate Vikas Singh, appearing for Rai, submitted that without prejudice to all the submissions and contentions, the petitioner is willing to submit his statement in response to the memorandum The bench said let the needful be done on or before August 15.
Advocate Gaurav Agrawal, appearing for the high court, told the bench that an appropriate decision after considering the matter in entirety, including the response so filed by the petitioner, shall be taken within two days thereafter.
The bench has listed the matter for further consideration on August 18.
The plea has alleged that the “non-speaking” order of February 8, 2022 passed by the high court keeping the petitioner under suspension with immediate effect is “manifestly arbitrary and violates the principles of natural justice”.
“There is no reliance placed on any material while arriving at the said decision. The order merely states that disciplinary proceedings are pending against the petitioner and therefore, in exercise of the powers under Sub-rule (1) of Rule 6 of the Bihar Judicial Service (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 2020 places the petitioner under suspension,” it said.
The plea claimed the petitioner had only sought consideration for restoration of his seniority on the basis of a new evaluation system introduced by the high court, which first issued show cause notice and later suspended him without giving any reasons, merely for questioning the process of evaluation of judgements.
The petitioner had joined the Bihar Judicial Services in 2007.
