A Delhi judicial officer has moved the Supreme Court to expunge certain adverse remarks said to have been made against him by the Delhi High Court for criticising Delhi Police officials.
The plea was filed by an Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ), who has challenged the Delhi High Court’s refusal to recall such orders containing the adverse remarks.
A bench of Justices Aniruddha Bose and Bela M Trivedi on September 15 issued notice to the respondents including to the Delhi Police Commissioner.
The remarks complained of by the judicial officer were made by Justice Anish Dayal of the Delhi High Court earlier this year.
In his orders, Justice Dayal had opined that the “Ld. ASJ (judicial officer) has excessively exaggerated the issues relating to the conduct of the petitioners (the SHO and the IO) in relation to investigation and keeping of records.”
Justice Dayal had also commented that “the Ld. ASJ ought not to have embarked on an inexorable quest when his original concern had been suitably addressed. The remarks and the phraseology used by the Ld. ASJ is summary in nature, penal in its scope, stigmatizing in its tone and tenor and as already motioned, beyond the ken of expected judicial conduct.”
By way of background, the ASJ while deciding on anticipatory bail pleas filed by two men accused of stealing sarees from a shop, had passed strictures against the police officials investigating the case.
He had also directed the police commissioner to launch an inquiry into the conduct of the officials in question. Further, an explanation was sought as to why the crime records bureau data was not updated with respect to the accused.
However, the High Court later objected to these directions by the ASJ and deleted his directions to the police. Thereafter, the High Court refused to stay its order prompting the judicial officer to approach the Supreme Court with an appeal.
The judicial officer contended that the High Court failed to consider Rule 13 of the Delhi Police (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, which allow for strictures to be passed against police officials by lower courts.
Further, the directions to update crime records bureau data is in line with Supreme Court decisions, the judicial officer’s appeal stated.
Before the top court, Senior Advocate P Chidambaram briefed by advocate Sagar Suri appeared for the judicial officer. The plea was filed through advocate Anil Kumar Mishra.
On a related note, Justice Swarna Kanta Sharma of the Delhi High Court had recently refused to expunge remarks made in a 2022 order criticising the sessions judge’s order in another case wherein adverse comments were made by him against a Delhi police officer.
In the order passed last year, Justice Sharma of the High Court had emphasised that judicial strictures need to be passed with utmost circumspection.
Earlier this month, the High Court rejected the judicial officer’s plea to delete such remarks from the order. The High Court reasoned that it had not made any remark that could be termed as a “stricture” which could affect the trial court judge’s future prospects.
