Supreme Court Sets Aside Madras HC Judgment Which Was Signed & Uploaded After Judge's Retirement
The Supreme Court on Tuesday (October 1) restored a quashing petition related to a corruption case to the file of the Madras High Court, noting that the judgment in the case was signed and uploaded after the judge, Justice T. Mathivanan, had retired.
Justice Abhay Oka, after dictating the order, emphasized, “There should not be a single incident like this” referring to the issuance of the detailed judgment after the judge's retirement.
A bench of Justice Abhay Oka and Justice Augustine George Masih noted the report of the Registrar General and the Joint Registrar of the Personal Assistance Section of the Madras HC that indicated that the detailed judgment was received from the judge after his retirement on May 26, 2017.
“Faced with this situation we have no option but to set aside the judgement dated 15th May 2017 and restore CRL OP No. 2245 of 2017 to the file of the High Court”, the Court stated in its order.
The CBI filed the present SLP challenging the quashing of a disproportionate assets case against an IRS officer. The corruption case involves an IRS officer from the 1999 batch, who was accused of amassing assets worth over Rs. 3.2 crores, allegedly disproportionate to known sources of income, between January 2002 and August 2014.
The Court had earlier sought a report following CBI's claim that the judge had pronounced a one-line order in Court quashing the case but the certified copy of the judgment was made available after the judge's retirement. Further, the CBI claimed that the Chief Justice of the HC had ordered the case to be heard de novo.
Today, the Supreme Court referred to the report submitted by the Registrar General of the Madras HC. The report indicated that the case bundle, along with the detailed judgment dated May 15, 2017, was received by the Personal Assistance Section on July 17, 2017, and was sent for uploading on July 18, 2017. The judgment was eventually uploaded on July 20, 2017. A report from the Joint Registrar of the Personal Assistance Section was also attached to the Registrar's submission.
The report indicated the case in question was not among the nine cases previously ordered for a de novo hearing by the Chief Justice.
However, considering the circumstances, the Supreme Court found it necessary to set aside the judgment dated May 15, 2017, and restore the quashing petition to the file of the Madras High Court.
The Court directed that the restored petition be listed before the roster bench of the HC on October 21, 2024, and that the petitioners and respondents be present on that day. No further notice will be issued. On the scheduled date, the High Court was ordered to fix a date for the final hearing of the case, taking into account that the petition is from 2017.
The Supreme Court also held that any interim relief granted until May 15, 2017, would continue until the restored petition is decided by the HC. The Court made it clear that it had not made any determinations on the merits of the case and left all issues open for the HC to decide.
The Supreme Court has previously dealt with similar issues. Recently, a bench led by Justice Oka quashed another judgment by Justice Mathivanan on the grounds that the judge had released a detailed judgment five months after his retirement, which the Court described as "gross impropriety."
Case no. – SLP (Crl.) No. 9492/2018 Diary No. 29909/2018
Case Title – State through the Inspector of Police CBI/ACB/Chennai v. S. Murali Mohan