Critical analysis of judgment welcome but not allegations against judge: Rajasthan High Court

The Rajasthan High Court recently remarked that while a critical analysis of a judgment in the right perspective is appreciated, the practice of casting aspersions on judges must be deprecated [Babulal vs. Shri Mahaveer Jain Swetamber Pedhi(Trust)]..Justice Dr. Nupur Bhati also said that lawyers are expected to maintain restraint and not make allegations against the Presiding Officer of a Court. “Casting aspersions on the Judicial Officers is a practice which is required to be severely depreciated particularly when the judicial orders are challenged. Critical analysis of a judgment in right perspective has to be appreciated but casting allegations upon a Judge if allowed would hit at the root of the system of justice,” the Court said..The Court was hearing a petition challenging a district court’s order in a matter related to the management of a temple trust. One of the prayers in the petition before the High Court was to transfer the case to a different judge. The petition alleged that the Presiding Officer was acting in connivance with a lawyer by not treating the service of summons as complete in the suit. .However, after considering the submissions and material on record, the High Court found that the trial court had rightly observed that the service was incomplete in the suit. It thus refused to interfere with the trial court's order.On the allegations made against the Presiding Officer, the Court observed that the apprehension of petitioners had sprung from the fact the judge had denied their request for treating the service of summons as complete.The Court opined that the petitioners have the right to challenge the decision before a higher court, rather than seeking a transfer of the trial to another court."Such practice (casting aspersions on a judge to seek a transfer of the case) is deprecated and in case the judicial order passed by the learned District Judge is not acceptable to the petitioners, then it is open for them to challenge the same on judicial side. It is expected from the lawyers to maintain all the restraint and not make allegations against a Presiding Officer," the Court added. .It also noted that petitioners had mentioned that a complaint was filed by the Jalore Bar against the Presiding Officer, which was pending before the High Court's Chief Justice. The Court said that even if such a complaint is pending, “the rights of the Bar and the individual lawyers cannot become a ground for pleading on the judicial side.".The Court also referred to Section 1 of the Judicial Officers Protection Act and observed that it contains the common law on rule of immunity of judges based on the principle that a person holding office should be in a position to discharge his functions with complete independence.The Court concluded that no interference was required in the order under challenge, and decided to impose costs on the petitioners.“The petitioner is directed to deposit the cost of Rs.10,000/- before the Rajasthan State Legal Services Authority, Jodhpur,” it ordered..Advocates CS Kotwani and Swati Shekhar represented the petitioners..[Read Order]