Karnataka High Court Dismisses Plea Seeking Protection For Justice HP Sandesh Who Spoke Of "Transfer Threat"

"No factual foundation has been laid either in the pleadings or in the email dated 5-07-2020 with regard to any threat perception to Justice H P Sandesh. It has also not been stated that the security provided to him is inadequate."

It added, "The State government in any case is under obligation to provide adequate security to the judges of the High Court, therefore we do not find any merit in the prayer to provide (Y, Y+, Z, Z+) security. Especially in the absence of any stand taken that present security provided to Justice H P Sandesh is inadequate."

Justice Sandesh had in his order dated July 11, recorded that he was given an indirect threat of transfer by a sitting judge during the farewell dinner function organised by the High Court to bid farewell to former Chief Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi on July 1.

"Article 222 of Constitution of India provides for a transfer of one High Court Judge to another in the manner prescribed in the Article," the High Court said.

As regards to the other prayer for constituting a special investigation team to investigate the threats given to Justice Sandesh as disclosed by him in open court, the bench said that the matter is sub-judice before the Supreme Court.

While considering the petitions filed filed by the Anti-Corruption Bureau of Karnataka and its chief Seemant Kumar Singh ADGP against certain adverse observations made by Justice Sandesh, the Supreme Court said that Justice Sandesh made "irrelevant observations" and went beyond the scope of the bail application moved by one of the accused. It also stayed the directions passed by the Judge against the ACB such as the calling for closure reports filed so far and service records of the officers.

"From the perusal of the aforesaid order, it is evident that the second relief prayed in this writ petition is sub-judice before the Supreme Court and therefore the same cannot be dealt with in this writ petition," the High Court said.

It also noted that the bail petition was dismissed as default bail is granted to the applicant. Following which it said, "We therefore do not find any merit in the petition and the same is dismissed."

The plea had said the reliefs sought are crucial for the overall benefit of the judicial system since such threats hinder Judges in impartial discharge of their constitutional duties and erodes people's faith in the judiciary.

"Disclosure by a judge of Hon'ble High Court stature in open court about "threat of transfer" for discharging his constitutional duties sincerely and in the interest of the general public, sends wrong message across the public domain if his Lordship's "concern of threat" is not properly addressed and ultimately it tends to shake enormous faith that People of India reposed on High Courts and its Judges," the plea said.

The plea had emphasized that judicial independence is the basic structure of the Constitution and it cannot be abridged by unwarranted "threats" to Judges.

Case Title: Ramesh Naik.L v. State of Karnataka

Case No: WP 14266/2022

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 284

Date of Order: 25-07-2022