Reconsider decision to suspend judge, Supreme Court tells Patna high court

The bench made the observation while hearing a plea by Shashi Kant Rai, the judicial officer who was suspended by the Patna high court on February 7 after he finished the trial in a rape case under the Pocso Act within a single day and awarded a life term to the accused last year.

The Supreme Court on Monday directed the Patna high court to reconsider within 10 days its decision to suspend a judicial officer for completing a trial in a record time of one day, while observing that any form of harsh action against an “overzealous officer” whose conduct is not in question could send a wrong message that efficiency is being punished.

Shashi Kant Rai, who was posted at Araria, headed the special court hearing cases under the Pocso Act.(Agencies)

“Unless there is mala fide 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,” a bench of justices UU Lalit and S Ravindra Bhat said.

The bench made the observation while hearing a plea by Shashi Kant Rai, the judicial officer who was suspended by the Patna high court on February 7 after he finished the trial in a rape case under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (Pocso) Act within a single day and awarded a life term to the accused last year.

Rai, who was posted at Araria, headed the special court hearing cases under the Pocso Act.

In July, the judicial officer approached the top court, claiming that he has always maintained a good academic and professional track record since he joined the Bihar Judicial Service in 2007 and was promoted twice as civil judge (senior division) in 2014 and as district judge in 2018.

Taking note of Rai’s plea, the top court advised the high court to withdraw its suspended order. “Our sincere advice to you is to drop everything (against the officer). If you don’t, we will go threadbare into it,” the bench warned.

“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 counselled before passing an appraisal order or else it becomes very unfair,” it added.

Appearing for the high court, advocate Gaurav Agarwal informed the bench that the officer in question was served with an official memorandum of charges against him on August 5. Once Rai responds, the high court will take a final call on the matter by August 18, Agarwal said.

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

The high court wanted to produce the file pertaining to the officer’s suspension before the top court when the latter asked it 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 asserted.

Following Rai’s plea, the top court on July 29 had issued a notice to the high court and even directed his security to be restored.

On the last occasion, the top court, however, had come down hard on the judicial officer for passing decisions in such a manner.

While Rai completed the trial in the above POCSO case in a single day, he completed the trial in another similar case in four days. The accused in the second case was awarded the death sentence.

“Where there are 40 million cases pending before the lower courts in this country, should any judge who provides speedy justice be punished in this manner,” Rai’s counsel and senior advocate Vikas Singh had said.

To this, the bench responded: “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 a death sentence which is a question of life and death of a person.”

In a representation to the high court in December 2020, Rai said he had sought retrospective seniority. He said that since 2007, there was no adverse remark in his annual confidential report (ACR), thus entitling him to an early promotion.

However, on September 25, 2021, the high court issued a show cause notice to him, citing violation of a rule under Bihar Judicial Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules 2020 for questioning its decision to deny him appointment as civil judge (senior division) from 2013-14, instead of 2014-15.