MP High Court denies relief to civil judge accused of preparing clean chit for accused before trial was over

The Madhya Pradesh High Court recently refused to interfere with disciplinary proceedings initiated against a civil judge accused of preparing an judgment acquitting a government official even before the criminal trial in the matter had been completed [Vijendra Singh Rawat v. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.].

The civil judge was accused of preparing such a judgment to unduly benefit an administrative service officer named Santosh Verma, who was supposed to receive the IAS award but could not get it because a criminal trial against him was pending.

In an order passed on June 24, a Bench of Justice Anand Pathak and Justice BP Sharma took a serious view of these allegations.

"The allegations levelled against the petitioner concern the preparation of an acquittal judgment of an accused person despite the criminal case not having been lawfully concluded. Such allegations are of the gravest nature and concern the integrity of the judicial institution itself," the Court held.

It proceeded to disimiss a petition challenging a charge-sheet/ show cause issued against the civil judge by the High Court administration.

The Court further held that the disciplinary inquiry against the judge can continue even though a criminal case arising from the same allegations is also pending. The Court reasoned that such allegations concerning the integrity of a judicial officer cannot be kept pending indefinitely until the criminal trial concludes.

It added that the disciplinary authority is duty-bound to examine whether the officer's conduct conforms to the standards of integrity and propriety expected of a judicial officer.

The case concerned a civil judge (senior division) posted in Indore. After allegations arose that he had improperly prepared an acquittal judgment in a case against a State official, the matter was eventually taken note of by the High Court on its administrative side.

After examining the material, a disciplinary authority placed the civil judge under suspension and issued a charge-sheet on December 19, 2025 under the Madhya Pradesh Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1966. An Inquiry Officer and a Presenting Officer were also appointed to conduct a departmental inquiry against the civil judge.

Aggrieved, the civil judge (petitioner) approached the High Court seeking to quash the disciplinary proceedings.

He argued that the alleged incident dated back to 2020, but the charge-sheet was issued only in December 2025, rendering the disciplinary proceedings vitiated by an inordinate delay.

He further contended that there was already a criminal prosecution pending in the matter and that continuing the disciplinary inquiry would prejudice his defence in the pending trial.

The State and the High Court opposed the petition, contending that the allegations were exceptionally grave and concerned the integrity of a judicial officer. The matter warranted a thorough disciplinary inquiry, they maintained.

The Court eventually held that the petitioner had failed to demonstrate any actual prejudice caused by the alleged delay in the issue of the chargesheet in the disciplinary inquiry.

It also held that there is no legal prohibition against simultaneous criminal and departmental proceedings. The disciplinary inquiry could not be indefinitely postponed merely because the criminal prosecution was pending, the Court said.

Hence, the Court dismissed the petition and clarified that its observations would not influence the disciplinary authority while deciding the departmental proceedings on the merits.

Advocate Narendra Chouhan appeared for the petitioner.

Government Advocate Kanak Gaharwar appeared for the State.

Advocate Khalid Noor Fakhruddin appeared for other respondents.

[Read Order]