Judicial Strictures Must Be Passed With Utmost Circumspection, Criticism May Have Devastating Effect On Professional Career Of Officers: Delhi High Court

Emphasizing that judicial strictures need to be passed with utmost circumspection, the Delhi High Court on Tuesday observed that such orders are bound to have an "everlasting affect" on the reputation of the person against whom such remarks are made.

Observing that every word forming part of a judicial order forms a permanent record, Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma said that judicial restraint as warranted by law and judicial proceedings is one of the qualities of a judicial officer.

"Use of denigrating remarks against anyone, especially against police officials impeaching their credibility and questioning their sense of dedication towards duty, is not the best course adopted by a judicial officer, that too when the same is not required for the adjudication of the case before the Court. Such criticism may have a devastating effect on the professional career of an officer," said the court. 

Justice Sharma however said that the court in no way "undermines the majesty of the court and its power to pass orders pointing out any disobedience on part of police officers or fault in any investigation."

The court made the observations while dealing with a plea filed by a SHO posted at Greater Kailash-I police station seeking deletion of remarks made against him by the trial court in criminal appeals arising out of a case registered under Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

The SHO had also sought quashing of the directions issued by the trial court to the Commissioner of Police for an inquiry against him. The trial court on September 06 said "Whether or not an officer like SHO PS GK-I is fit for performing duties as SHO is left on wisdom of CP, Delhi to take a call..."

While expunging the remarks, Justice Sharma observed that undesirable judicial strictures that penalise a person without enquiry stigmatise the officer and must be avoided.

"Social memories that stigmatize a person in society or in one‟s department or social circles are often as permanent as the judgments and orders," the court said.

The court further said that though the police officers are duty bound to discharge their responsibilities with utmost conviction, the practical difficulties which are faced by them cannot be overlooked and disregarded by courts.

"The judicial power comes with utmost responsibility to exercise adjudicatory liberty to express oneself. Judicial strictures against a police officer to the extent as expressed in the present case are problematic though every disapproval expressed by exercise of adjudicatory liberty of expression may not fall in the realm of lack of judicial restraint," the court said.

Observing that the strictures made by the trial court against the SHO are beyond the mandate of law, judicial precedents and discipline of judicial restraint, the court said the same amounted to "over-stepping adjudicatory liberty of expression exercised by a judge."

"Such observations have the effect of stigmatizing without conviction, sentencing without inquiry and affect career in future of an officer which had to be left to the internal administrative vigilance and disciplinary proceedings to be conducted by the parent department of the officer in question," the court said.

The bench said the trial court could have forwarded the proceedings, the issue faced by it and the act of disobedience to the concerned Commissioner of Police for action as per their departmental Standing Orders and the rules applicable to them.

"In the relevant cases, recourse could have been taken to the Delhi Police Act and the relevant Sections under law under which the Court can issue notice and initiate appropriate action if so warranted in a particular case. However, to direct the authority concerned to initiate action as mentioned in the impugned order and thereafter, ask for compliance to be filed and pass remarks as in the impugned order was unwarranted in the facts and circumstances of the case," the court said.

Allowing the plea, the court directed that the order be circulated for the benefit of all judicial officers and Director (Academics) of Delhi Judicial Academy for taking note of the same.

Title: AJIT KUMAR v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI)

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 1105

Click Here To Read Order