The Delhi High Court has expunged adverse observations made in a 2023 judgment, about a district judge who was criticised for summoning senior Delhi Police officers and later issuing a non-bailable warrant (NBW) against a senior police officer [State (NCT of Delhi) through Deputy Commissioner of Police, Delhi v. Shadab].
Justice Amit Bansal relied on a Supreme Court judgment, which cautioned that courts should show restraint in making adverse comments on the conduct and caliber of judicial officers, as such comments could prejudice their careers.
Accordingly, the Court redacted the critical observations earlier made with regard to the conduct of the judicial officer/ district judge.
"Applying the ratio of the aforesaid (Supreme Court) judgment to the facts of the present case, paragraphs 15 and 23 of the aforesaid judgment (which contained critical comments about the district court judge) shall stand expunged," the High Court ordered.
The judicial officer had filed an application to recall certain critical comments made in a High Court ruling passed in December 2023.
The said judgment was passed on an appeal filed by the Delhi Police challenging certain adverse remarks made by the judicial officer against police officers in orders that were passed in July and August 2023.
In its December 2023 judgment, the High Court had observed that the district judge had breached judicial discipline by disregarding directions not to unnecessarily insist on the personal appearance of senior police officials.
The High Court had further noted that the district judge did not stop at issuing summons to such officers, but even issued non-bailable warrants against senior officers of the Delhi Police after the Deputy Commissioner of Police (Crime) failed to appear before the district court on a certain date.
"The directions of the Judge to direct the personal presence of IO/SHO/ACP/DCP in the present case was completely uncalled for and unwarranted. Further, the directions to issue bailable warrants against the DCP (Crime) was also completely unjustified and without any authority of law," the High Court noted in its 2023 judgment.
It also directed that a copy of this ruling be sent to an Inspection Committee of the High Court.
In his application, the judicial officer who was criticised urged the High Court to delete its critical observations and the direction to escalate the matter to the Inspection Committee.
He pointed out that such a course of action would adversely affect his Annual Confidential Report and his career.
The High Court, on July 4, acceded to his request and deleted two paragraphs in its earlier judgment.
"Counsel for the applicant submits that he would be satisfied if paragraphs 15 and 23 of the aforesaid judgment are expunged ... paragraphs 15 and 23 of the aforesaid judgment shall stand expunged. The application stands disposed of," the Court said.
Additional Standing Counsel Sanjeev Bhandari, with advocates Sushant Bali, Arjit Sharma and Nikunj Bindal appeared for the State.
Advocates Sagar Suri and Kabir Sagar Ghosh appeared for the judicial officer.
[Read order]