Supreme Court “Showing Magnanimity” Closes Contempt Proceedings Against UP Official For False Affidavit, Imposes Rs. 5 Lakh Cost On State

The Supreme Court on Friday (September 27) closed contempt proceedings against the former Principal Secretary of the Uttar Pradesh Prisons Administration Department for making false statement in his affidavit filed to explain delay in deciding remission plea of a convict.

“We can go deep into the matter and fix the responsibility, but we are facing huge pendency of cases and therefore we do not feel it appropriate to waste time on such matters especially when notwithstanding grant of opportunity to the officers to come clean, they have not chosen to come clean. If magnanimity has to be shown, it is to be shown by persons occupying the highest judicial office and therefore to save time of the court we have decided to show magnanimity and close the proceedings including notice of contempt…However we direct the State of Uttar Pradesh to pay cost of Rs. 5 lakhs to the UP State Legal Services Authority within one month. As the petitioner has been granted order of premature release, nothing further is required to be disposed of.”

A bench of Justice Abhay S Oka and Justice Augustine George Masih had issued the contempt notice after observing that Rajesh Singh, the former Principal Secretary, walked back his earlier stance that the CM Secretariat did not accept remission files due to Model Code of Conduct during Lok Sabha elections.

The Court today made it clear that though it is closing the proceedings to save time, it does not accept any explanation offered by the government officers for the contempt.

“We have no manner of doubt that there was a complete disobedience by the officers of the state with our order dated 13th May 2024. We are also convinced that the file was not being accepted by the Office of the Secretary of the Chief Minister during the course during the code of conduct. That is very clear from the observations made by this court in earlier orders. We thought that the Chief Secretary will come clean. That has not happened. All that we can say is it is impossible to accept explanations offered by the officers of the state government”, the Court stated in the order.

The Court criticised Singh him for shifting the blame for the delay on the state's Standing Counsel by claiming that the counsel had not communicated the Court's May 13 order that clarified that the MCC will not obstruct the remission process.

On August 12, while appearing online, Singh had stated that the Chief Minister's Secretariat was not accepting remission-related files during the enforcement of the MCC. However, the Court noted, in later affidavits and during the inquiry conducted by the Chief Secretary of the State, he claimed he had misunderstood the question of the Bench in the Court.

During the hearing, Justice Oka expressed frustration at this shift, noting, “The Secretary repeats that he did not understand the question put forth by us. We hope that senior officer has elementary understanding of simple English. Now we will not believe government officers appearing online…We have learnt a lesson very hard way that never believe a statement when an officer appears online. Now we will not believe anybody. We will call all the officers here in court, no leniency. Let them travel hundreds of kilometres, they will come here, we will record the statements, take their signatures and place it on record.”

From the record of the movement of the file, the Court has opined that Singh's earlier stance was true and the CM Secretariat was indeed not accepting files during the MCC, despite the Court's May 13 order.

Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi for State of UP contended that on August 12, Singh was talking about another remission file was returned from the CM's Office due to a lack of clarity. However, the bench pointed out that this in fact proved officer's earlier statement that the files were not being accepted despite Court orders. “We are sure that not a single file was accepted during MCC”, Justice Oka said.

Justice Oka added, “Please accept the fact that despite court orders files were not being accepted by the CM Office due to Code of Conduct. We are very disturbed that after so many orders the officer is maintaining that he did not understand the query. Now the Chief Secretary must say that the files for remission were not being accepted during Code of Conduct.”

Justice Oka said that this was not about the prestige of individual judges, but about ensuring that the judicial system is not undermined by false statements from government officers. “It is not about the prestige of individual judges. This is about the system and if the system is to be taken on a ride by making one false statement after the other, we will never accept it. Therefore, the officer must come clean, the Chief Secretary must say that yes during that period the files of premature release were not accepted by the Chief Minister's office.”

Ultimately, the Court chose not to pursue the matter after noting that despite granting opportunities, the state government officers have not come clean.

Advocates CK Rai (AOR) and Arvind Tiwari represented the petitioner.

Case no. – Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 134/2022

Case Title – Ashok Kumar v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr. 

Citation : 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 768

Click Here To Read/Download Order