The Supreme Court on Friday recalled parts of its August 4 order directing administrative action against Justice Prashant Kumar of the Allahabad High Court.
However, the Bench of Justices JB Pardiwala and R Mahadevan did not delete a key paragraph that instructed the Chief Justice of the High Court to “immediately withdraw the present criminal determination” from the judge.
While deleting paragraphs 25 and 26 of its August 4 order following a written request from Chief Justice of India (CJI) BR Gavai, the Bench did not expressly delete paragraph 24, which had directed the High Court Chief Justice to immediately withdraw criminal matters from Justice Kumar's roster. Paragraph 24 stated,
"The Chief Justice of High Court shall immediately withdraw the present criminal determination from the concerned Judge."
Paragraph 26 contained the crucial direction that Justice Kumar should not be assigned any criminal matters till he demits office. The same has been deleted.
In its order dated August 8, the top court stated that it was “deleting paras 25 and 26 respectively” in deference to the Chief Justice of India’s request. It added that the August 4 order be corrected accordingly, but made no mention of paragraph 24.
The August 4 order was passed while allowing a special leave petition filed by M/S Shikhar Chemicals challenging a May 2025 order by Justice Kumar. By the May order, the High Court judge had dismissed a petition seeking the quashing of criminal proceedings arising from a commercial transaction.
While remanding the matter for reconsideration by a different judge, the Supreme Court had strongly criticised Justice Kumar’s reasoning. It expressed shock at his conclusion that civil disputes could be pursued through criminal prosecution because civil suits “take years to conclude”.
On August 4, the top court proceeded to issue sweeping administrative directions against Justice Kumar.
“We have been constrained to issue directions as contained in Paras 22, 23, 24, 25 and 26 respectively… Many such erroneous orders have been looked into by us over a period of time,” the August 4 order stated.
These directions, particularly the removal of criminal law work from Justice Kumar until his retirement, drew criticism from within both the Supreme Court and the Allahabad High Court.
At least 13 judges of the High Court wrote to Chief Justice Arun Bhansali urging him to convene a full court meeting and resist the Supreme Court’s directives against Justice Kumar.
The letter, authored by Justice Arindam Sinha and signed by 12 other judges, called the apex court’s directions “scathing”, adding that it was passed “without issuance of notice."
Subsequently, the case was re-listed and heard again on August 8.
In its August 8 order, the Supreme Court clarified that it had no intention to “cause embarrassment or cast aspersions on the concerned judge” and reiterated that the judiciary must protect its institutional dignity.
“It is not just a matter of error or mistake committed by the Judge concerned in appreciating the legal points or facts. We were concerned about the appropriate direction to be issued in the interest of justice and with a view to protecting the honour and dignity of the institution,” the Court said.
Although it deleted its earlier directions in paragraphs 25 and 26 of the August 4 order, it reaffirmed that the judiciary must step in when the rule of law is undermined.
“When matters raise institutional concerns affecting the rule of law, this Court may be compelled to step in and take corrective steps,” the Bench had said.
The Court also reiterated that the Chief Justice of the High Court is the master of the roster and that its directions were not meant to interfere with that administrative power.
Hence, it left it to the Chief Justice of the High Court to look into the matter.
"While we are deleting paras 25 and 26 respectively from our order dated 04th August, 2025, we leave it to the Chief Justice of the Allahabad High Court to look into the matter," the top court said, potentially leaving the application of paragraph 24 to the discretion of the Chief Justice of the High Court.
However, in the absence of any deletion or modification of paragraph 24 from the August 4 order, the direction for immediate removal of Justice Kumar from his current criminal roster remains in effect on paper.
Whether this omission was intentional or inadvertent remains unclear.
[Read Order]