Action against overzealous judge deciding cases in a day sends wrong message: SC

The officer in question, Shashi Kant Rai was suspended by the Patna high court on February 7 and had approached the top court in July this year

The Supreme Court on Monday asked the Patna high court to decide within 10 days on the fate of a judicial officer suspended for completing trial in record time of one day, while indicating that such harsh action against an overzealous officer whose conduct is not in question will send a wrong message down the line that efficiency is being punished.

The officer in question was served with the official memorandum of charges against him on August 5. (File image)

A bench of justices UU Lalit and S Ravindra Bhat said, “Unless there is malafide or corruption or something as glaring as that, an officer cannot be visited with (disciplinary) action. At best, you can say he is an overzealous officer. Ultimately, this is a matter of the institution as anything you say against a judicial officer reflects on the institution. It has serious ramifications as the message that goes out is that efficiency is being punished.”

The officer in question, Shashi Kant Rai was suspended by the Patna high court on February 7 this year and had approached the top court in July this year claiming that he maintained a good academic and professional track record since he joined the Bihar Judicial Service in 2007. He was promoted twice as civil judge (senior division) in 2014 and as District Judge in 2018.

The high court represented by advocate Gaurav Agarwal informed the Court that the officer in question was served with the official memorandum of charges against him on August 5. Once his response is received, the high court will take a final call by August 18.

The top court told the HC, “Our sincere advice to you is to drop everything (against the officer). If you don’t, we will go threadbare into it. It is not a very healthy idea. These are matters which must be sorted at training level. If the orders passed by a judicial officer are the subject matter of your proceedings, you can call him and the judge can be counseled before passing appraisal order or else it becomes very unfair.”

The bench directed the petitioner to respond to the memo of charges before August 15 and asked the high court to take a final decision on the officer’s reply before the matter is heard next on August 18.

The high court was even willing to produce the file pertaining to the suspension of the officer before the top court. But the bench asked the HC lawyer to understand the larger issue. “Do not drive matters to such a length that the future of the judicial officer comes under cloud and the going becomes difficult for him. Here, his conduct is not in question,” the bench added.

The Court had issued notice on Rai’s petition on July 29 and had even directed his security to be restored. Rai, who was posted at Araria headed the special court hearing cases under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.

Last year, Rai came into focus after he sentenced a rapist under POCSO Act to life term after finishing the trial within a record single day. In another judgment, the same judge completed trial in four days punishing the POCSO convict with death sentence.

On the last occasion, the bench had come down hard on the officer for such manner of passing decisions. Rai’s counsel senior advocate Vikas Singh had submitted, “Where there is 4 crore case pendency before the lower courts in this country, should any judge who provides speedy justice be punished in this manner.”

The bench had then observed, “Just because there is pendency that doesn’t mean that such an approach is commendable…. The approach of the petitioner (Rai) is definitely not in line with our judgments where we held that sentencing cannot be on the same day. This is death sentence which is a question of life and death of a person.”

According to Rai, in December 2020, he sent a representation to the HC seeking retrospective seniority. He stated that since 2007, there was never any adverse remark in his annual confidential report (ACR) thus entitling him to an early promotion. The high court issued a show cause notice to him on September 25, 2021 citing violation of a rule under Bihar Judicial Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules 2020 for questioning HC’s decision to deny him civil judge (senior division) from 2013-14, instead of 2014-15 and was punished with a suspension.