Madhya Pradesh HC recalls direction asking Registrar General to challenge single-judge order in Supreme Court

The Madhya Pradesh High Court on Wednesday withdrew its earlier direction asking the Registrar General of the High Court to file an appeal before the Supreme Court against an order of a single-judge of the High Court. .Single-judge Justice Rajesh Kumar Gupta had on September 12, 2025 recommended an inquiry into a judicial order passed by Additional Sessions Judge Vivek Sharma.In the order, Justice Gupta had recommended an inquiry against judge Sharma for dropping certain charges against a person accused of embezzlement in a land acquisition matter.A Division Bench of Justice Atul Sreedharan and Justice Pradeep Mittal had later taken suo motu cognizance of the order passed by Justice Gupta.The Division Bench led by Justice Sreedharan, who has since been transferred to Allahabad High Court, had said that Justice Gupta's order was based on speculation and would have chilling effect on trial judges.Accordingly, it had directed the High Court Registrar General to file an appeal against the order before the Supreme Court. The appeal was never filed.This order has now been recalled..On April 22, a Division Bench of Chief Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva and Justice Vinay Saraf said the matter has since been placed before an administrative committee of the High Court and would be handled under an in-house mechanism."Keeping that in mind that the proceedings have already been placed before the Administrative Committee for its consideration and the matter is under active consideration of the Administrative Committee, we recall the order dated 22.9.2025 in so far as it issued a direction to the Registrar General of this Court to approach the Supreme Court, and direct that further action be taken in accordance with the recommendation of the Administrative Committee and by the Competent Authority thereafter," the Bench said.It also ordered closure of the suo motu proceedings in the matter..The Court noted that the earlier Division Bench itself had recorded that judicial discipline dictates that such orders cannot be interfered with by the High Court and that the discretion was only with the Supreme Court to judicially examine them.The Bench added that subsequently, it had called for records of the cases as well as a report from the Principal Registrar (Vigilance). "Thereafter, the matter has been placed before the administrative committee," it said..Further, the Court took note of a recent Supreme Court decision in which it recommended that whenever any flaw is noted in any order passed by a trial judge, it should be considered in an in-house mechanism by the High Court. The Supreme Court in the decision passed on April 9 had cautioned High Courts against the growing tendency to publicly criticise subordinate judicial officers. In the present case, the Bench said it had already adopted a procedure on administrative side that any observation made in a judicial order or any recommendation made by a High Court judge is to be placed before the administrative committee..Advocate Sandeep Kumar Shukla appeared for the High Court.[Read Order]