'Unbecoming Of A Judge; He Auctioned His Dignity': Allahabad HC Quashes 'False' FIR Lodged By A CJM Against Govt Officials

A bench of Justice Rahul Chaturvedi and Justice Mohd. Azhar Husain Idrisi observed that CJM Banda Bhagwan Das Gupta levelled “wild and tailored” allegations of fraud, cheating, fabrication of documents, and extortion of money against the officials “to teach a bitter lesson” to them and to make them “understand the power and position of a CJM.

“These government servants (the petitioners) are of the Electricity Department, were not serving his interest or dancing on his tune, thus by initiating a criminal prosecution against them after levelling bogus and wild allegations, the respondent no.4 wants to kneel down them, before him,” the Court noted in its 25-page order.

Importantly, the Court opined that CJM Banda virtually auctioned his chair, dignity, and position by making false, motivated, and purposive allegations in the FIR by misusing his powers as CJM Banda.

Further, the Court also stressed the level of the standard expected from the Judges/magistrates as it emphasised that Judges' behaviour, conduct, temperament, and tolerance should also be at par with their constitutional position and the same cannot be compared with other officers discharging their duties for implementing the policies in the society

“The first and foremost quality required in a Judge is his integrity. The need of integrity in the judiciary is much higher than other institution. The judiciary is an institution whose foundation is based on honesty, impartiality and integrity of sterling quality. Judges must remember that they are not merely an employee but they hold a high public office. The standard of conduct expected of a Judge is much than that of an ordinary person,” the Court said.

The division bench made these observations while quashing the FIR against the state's electricity department officials at Banda Kotwali Police Station.

The case in brief

As per the facts of the case, the CJM Gupta bought a house in a locality in Lucknow from one Vandana Pathak. After the purchase, when CJM Gupta applied to change the electricity account to his name, he was informed by the SDO of the local electricity substation that there was an outstanding bill of Rs. 166,916 on the electricity connection.

Perturbed by this, CJM Gupta filed a complaint in August 2013 before the Additional Civil Judge in Lucknow against Vandana Pathak (the previous owner of the house), her husband, and several electricity department officials for fraud and other charges u/s 420, 464, 467, 468, 504, 506 IPC.

It was the case of the officials that they were only responsible for informing the outstanding amount and had no involvement in the property dealings between Pathak/Awasthi and CJM Gupta.

The Additional Civil Judge in Lucknow issued a summons against the respondents; however, no substantial case was found against the electricity department officials later, so the case was dropped.

As the legal battle continued, CJM Gupta kept losing the legal battle at Lucknow and, thereafter, at the District Consumer Forum, Lucknow. He was also denied relief from the Electricity Ombudsman as well.

The High Court noted that when CJM Gupta failed to attain his objective at Lucknow, he decided to “cook up a fake story” and by “auctioning his chair and position as C.J.M., Banda,” he managed to lodge the F.I.R. against the petitioners in Banda u/s 406, 409, 419, 420, 464, 467, 468, 471, 386 I.P.C. The electricity department officials challenged the said FIR in the present petition.

Taking note of this act of CJM Banda (of lodging an FIR in Banda after losing legal battle in Lucknow), the Court observed thus:

“This fact itself speaks volumes about the hidden objective, design and ill motive of Respondent no.4. It is not expected from a C.J.M. that he would use his office and the chair to subserve his personal interest against the petitioners. It is unheard off, that a sitting Chief Judicial Magistrate is acting as an ordinary litigant so as to trap the officials of Electricity Department by initiating a criminal proceeding against them, who probably have declined the Respondent No.4 to serve his interest.”

The Court further said that CJM Gupta “stooped down” to the level when he started hobnobbing and conniving with the SI in Kotwali Police Station Banda to lodge an FIR at Banda, where he was posted as CJM.

“This is an unbecoming of a C.J.M. of the district. When the concerned C.J.M., as mentioned above, lost his case at Lucknow, then in its second innings, he has successfully prevailed upon the S.I. named above to lodge the F.I.R., making all sorts of wild and venomous allegations against the petitioners for alleged act of fraud, cheating, fabricating the documents and extortion of money against the petitioners,” the Court observed.

During the hearing of the case, the Court formed a Special Investigation Team to probe the matter. In its report, the SIT found that no crime was committed against the electricity department officials (seeking bribe) as alleged in the FIR.

The SIT found that every allegation made in the FIR. against the accused petitioners is false, motivated and purposive, and all the concerned witnesses, in their respective statements, unequivocally accused CJM Banda of exerting pressure upon them.

Against this backdrop, finding it to be a case of personal vengeance, the Court opined that the impugned FIR was driven by malafides and in the colourable exercise of the power vested in CJM Gupta. Thus, the same was liable to be quashed.

The Court emphasised that the office of a Judge is full of responsibility as he is supposed to perform a divine job, but in the instant case, the Court added, the conduct and character of CJM Gupta were well short of those essential and basic characteristics, rather unbecoming of a Judge.

“If this is the standard of a Judge, then fate and future of subordinate judiciary is pitch dark and rudderless. He cannot be permitted to enjoy his position as C.J.M. and behave and act as an ordinary litigant. His own interest, it seems, is of the paramount consideration, for which he can stoop down to any level,” the Court remarked.

Given this, the Court directed that in future, if any judicial officer or Judge wants to become the first informant in his personal capacity in any FIR, he must take his concerned District Judge into confidence and, after having the assent from the District Judge only, he can become an informant of any FIR [except in the matter of grave and severe nature like murder, suicide, rape or other sexual offences, dowry death, decoity].

Besides this, while quashing the FIR, the Court directed the Registrar General of the Court to keep the copy of the judgment in the dossier/service record of Dr. Bhagwan Das Gupta, C.J.M., Banda.