Supreme Court Expunges Remarks Against Judge In Gauhati HC Judgment

The Supreme Court on Friday (10th November) ordered expunction of certain disparaging remarks made by the Gauhati High Court against a Special NIA Court Judge, who is at present a sitting judge of the High Court.

"..we are of the opinion that the adverse observations against the petitioner as contained in paragraphs 130, 190,191, 192, 193,194 and 233 and in any other relevant portion of the order are treated as expunged and shall not be held against the petitioner in any manner" the bench of Justice AS Bopanna and Justice PS Narasimha stated in its order. 

The petitioner, who is currently a sitting judge of the Gauhati High Court, had approached the Top Court seeking expunction of some disparaging remarks made in a judgment of the Gauhati High Court against his ruling of conviction in an NIA case when he was a special judge, NIA, Gauhati, Assam. He sought for removal of remarks such as 'deep rooted bias in favour of the prosecution', 'acting in a sheerly partisan bent of mind that by any means the accused/ appellant Ahshringdaw Warisa had to be convicted', 'virtually predetermined conclusion' and 'committing an act of rank judicial impropriety while delivering the judgment' in the High Court judgment delivered on August 11, 2023.

The Apex Court made it clear that the impugned High Court judgment would remain in force, without the adverse remarks against the judge.

In 2017, the petitioner had delivered a judgment convicting the accused persons for various offences under the IPC and Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 and the Arms Act, 1959. In 2023, he was elevated as a judge of the High Court.

The plea states that the disparaging remarks of the High Court were unnecessary and should have been avoided. The role of High Court is of a friend, philosopher and guide of Judiciary subordinate to it, the petitioner urged in his plea. 

"..the said observations/remarks were not necessary for deciding the appeal and rendering the impugned judgment and therefore ought to have been avoided. The remarks have deeply hurt the petitioner’s reputation before his colleagues, lawyers and litigants and is disturbing his peace of mind besides affecting him in discharging his judicial duties with calm and confidence" the plea stated. 

Sr. Adv. Vijay Hansaria, AOR Somiran Sharma, Adv. Aadya Malik, Adv. Dhrubajit Saikia appeared for the Petitioner.

Case Title: X v. NATIONAL INVESTIGATION AGENCY