PRAYAGRAJ A division bench of the Allahabad High Court has observed that making “irresponsible insinuations about the judiciary or its officers has now become a fashion”. The observation came as the bench dismissed a writ petition whereby allegations were levelled against a judicial officer of Gautam Budh Nagar and a direction was sought from the court to institute an inquiry against the concerned judicial officer.
Dismissing the writ petition filed by one Ravi Kumar, a division bench comprising Justice Vivek Kumar Birla and Justice Rahul Chaturvedi, imposed a fine of ₹50,000 on the petitioner, stating, “This court records its strongest anguish and concern that the people at large are now making unwarranted and unsubstantiated and canards against the judicial officers relying upon their whims and capricious and making irresponsible allegations of dishonesty. The higher courts are duty-bound to save the dignity and honour of the system in general and the individual judicial officer as well that no person is permitted to make sweeping and wild allegations regarding the integrity and character of any judicial officer.”
The petitioner was aggrieved by an order as per which the date fixed in a case pending against the petitioner before the Gautam Budh Nagar district court was preponed by the lower court. In the present writ petition before the high court, the petitioner alleged conspiracy and bias on the part of the judicial officer concerned and requested the court to institute an inquiry against her.
Rejecting the request of the petitioner, the court in its order (dated October 18, 2022) said that if there is some order passed by the trial court with which the petitioner feels aggrieved, the right course is to challenge the same in a judicial capacity in the higher courts. “Submission, as has been raised by the petitioner to seek direction to institute an inquiry against the concerned judicial officer, is very vague and bald. There is absolutely no material to substantiate the same. It is very difficult to accept such kind of unsubstantiated insinuations to become a legitimate ground to initiate any inquiry.”
{{/usCountry}}Rejecting the request of the petitioner, the court in its order (dated October 18, 2022) said that if there is some order passed by the trial court with which the petitioner feels aggrieved, the right course is to challenge the same in a judicial capacity in the higher courts. “Submission, as has been raised by the petitioner to seek direction to institute an inquiry against the concerned judicial officer, is very vague and bald. There is absolutely no material to substantiate the same. It is very difficult to accept such kind of unsubstantiated insinuations to become a legitimate ground to initiate any inquiry.”
{{/usCountry}}