The Supreme Court on Tuesday expressed concern over threats and attacks faced by judges and their families, particularly in the light of reports of threats being faced by retired Bombay High Court judge Justice GS Patel and his family.
A Bench of Justices Satish Chandra Sharma and Sanjeev Sachdeva observed that such incidents strike at the administration of justice and could deter judges from discharging their duties fearlessly.
The Court was hearing a bail plea filed by a man accused of leading an attack on the residence of a judicial officer in Madhya Pradesh.
The Bench said that if judges are subjected to such intimidation for performing their duties, it would have serious consequences for the justice delivery system.
“You must have read in the newspapers, a retired judge of Bombay High Court is facing all kinds of threats, his grand daughter was assaulted in London, and you are doing all this to judges who are passing judgments? No judge will be able to pass a judgment,” the Court observed.
Justice Patel has reportedly faced a series of threats following his April 2024 judgment in the Dawoodi Bohra leadership dispute.
Recent reports indicate that members of his family, including his daughter in London, have been subjected to threats and acts of violence, prompting investigations by authorities in both India and the United Kingdom.
The top court's remarks about the incident came during the hearing of a bail plea filed by one Priyanshu Singh, who has been in custody for over seven months in connection with allegations that he was involved in vandalism at the residence of a magistrate in Madhya Pradesh.
According to the prosecution, the incident took place after Singh’s earlier bail application was rejected by the magistrate concerned. Thereafter, he allegedly conspired with others to target the judicial officer. The State claims that Singh and several co-accused entered the magistrate’s residential bungalow at night, damaged property, hurled stones, abused the officer and threatened to kill him.
The State also relied on CCTV footage, which it said showed Singh at different locations connected with the incident, including in front of the magistrate’s residence. It further argued that the offence amounted to interference with the administration of justice and could not be viewed lightly.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court rejected Singh’s bail plea in May, noting the seriousness of the allegations, his alleged role as the main accused and his criminal antecedents. The High Court recorded that seven criminal cases had been registered against him.
He then moved the Supreme Court for relief.
During the hearing before the Supreme Court, Singh's counsel argued that he had already spent more than seven months in custody and was arrested merely on suspicion. He also submitted that the allegations were serious but maintained that there was no direct material against Singh.
The Bench, however, appeared unconvinced by the submission and remarked that Singh was alleged to have led the group that attacked the magistrate’s residence.
“They have ransacked everything. And you were their leader. And there are seven criminal cases against you,” the Court observed.
Referring to the reported threats faced by Justice Patel and his family, the Court added such incidents could not be ignored.
“Don’t do all this. The grand child of retired Bombay High Court judge has not done anything. We have to take note,” the Bench said.
After hearing the parties, the Court did not grant bail. Instead, taking note of the period already spent in custody, it closed the petition while giving Singh liberty to file a fresh bail application before the trial court.