The Madhya Pradesh High Court on July 1 took suo motu cognisance of threats being issued to Additional District and Sessions Judge Tabassum Khan following her verdict sentencing seven men to life imprisonment for lynching a truck driver over allegations of cattle smuggling.

A Division Bench of Justice Vivek Agarwal and Justice Avanindra Kumar Singh also ordered that the judge be provided with immediate police protection.

"As an interim measure, we direct that our Judicial Officer, namely, Smt. Tabassum Khan, Additional Judge, Seonimalva to the Court of First District and Additional Session Judge, Narmadapuram (MP) be extended protection by the Superintendent of Police Narmadapuram," the Court said.

The order came in the backdrop of a sustained campaign targeting Judge Khan after she convicted seven men and sentenced them to life imprisonment for the 2022 lynching of truck driver Nazir Ahmed, who was assaulted by a mob over allegations of cattle smuggling.

Following the June 12 judgment, Judge Khan was subjected to death threats, communal abuse, misinformation campaigns and social media attacks questioning her impartiality because of her religious identity.

The Madhya Pradesh Police subsequently registered a first information report (FIR) against unidentified persons over the threats and online abuse.

The High Court took note of the matter while hearing a 2016 suo motu case concerning judicial officers in Madhya Pradesh.

"It has been brought to our notice by the learned counsel for the High Court as well as through media reports that one of the Judicial Officers at Narmadapuram has been subjected to constant threats by certain members of the society for passing an order against one of the stakeholders. This is a serious matter," the Court said.

The Court opined that the threats being faced by Judge Khan directly touches upon the independence of judicial officers.

"We are of the opinion that such activities directly hampers the judicial independence and fearless working of our Judicial Officers."

It also underscored that judicial orders are subject to challenge only through legal remedies such as appeals or revisions.

"Our judicial officer cannot be threatened merely because he or she choses to pass a particular order and that is not of liking of the certain section of the society," said the Court.

During the hearing, the State informed the Court that police protection had already been provided to Judge Khan. However, the Bench directed the Superintendent of Police, Narmadapuram, to also file an affidavit detailing the action taken against those who had allegedly threatened the judicial officer.

The Court further sought personal affidavits from the State's Director General of Police (DGP) and the Additional Chief Secretary/Principal Secretary (Home) on the steps taken against those responsible for the intimidation.

The matter is listed next on July 9.

Advocate Brajesh Nath Mishra appeared for the petitioner.

Additional Advocate General Janhvi Pandit and Deputy Advocate General Abhijeet Awasthy represented the State.

Advocate Rohan Harne appeared for the intervener.

[Read Order]