Supreme Court to revisit order barring Allahabad HC judge from criminal cases

FOllowing an interference by Chief justness of bharat (CJI) Bhushan R Gavai, a sublime margaret court bench is expected to reconsider its stinging August 4 order that stripped an Allahabad high court judge of all criminal jurisdiction until his retirement and directed him to sit with a senior judge to learn the nuances of law. The reconsideration, scheduled for Friday, comes amid concern that the top court may have overreached by issuing what effectively amounted to an administrative directive to a high court.A bench of Justices JB Pardiwala and R Mahadevan will take up the matter again, with people aware of the matter confirming that CJI Gavai met Justice Pardiwala on Wednesday evening to express institutional unease over the rare direction to de-roster a constitutional court judge by way of a judicial order.“The meeting ran for around half an hour. The CJI is learnt to have conveyed to the judge who authored the ruling that some of the directions may need tweaking in the larger interest of the institution and deference to the autonomy of high courts and their chief justices,” said one of the persons familiar with the development.This person added that CJI Gavai, while not disputing the gravity of the error in Justice Kumar’s ruling, was of the view that the remedy might have encroached on the high court’s administrative domain. “The decision to revisit the matter is thus aimed at striking a balance between judicial discipline and constitutional propriety.”Another person noted that several Supreme Court rulings have affirmed that the administrative control of high courts, including case assignments, lies solely with their chief justices. “There is precedent to show that even Supreme Court benches have consciously refrained from fixing hearing dates for matters before high courts to preserve institutional boundaries. Directing a de-rostering of a high court judge for his entire remaining tenure until 2029 might need a review,” added this person.In the August 4 verdict, the Supreme Court took the unprecedented step of barring Justice Prashant Kumar from handling any criminal matters for the rest of his judicial career, citing an “absurd” and “one of the worst” orders it had ever encountered.The judgment came in a case where Justice Kumar had dismissed a plea to quash a criminal case over a ₹7.23 lakh payment dispute, a matter the apex court found to be purely civil. The high court judge allowed the complainant to pursue criminal proceedings merely because he was a small businessman unable to afford a protracted civil suit. The apex court was unsparing in its criticism.“The judge concerned has not only cut a sorry figure for himself but has made a mockery of justice. We are at our wits’ end to understand what is wrong with the Indian judiciary at the level of the high court,” the bench had said.The order directed the chief justice of the Allahabad high court to ensure that Justice Kumar is never assigned any criminal jurisdiction again. It also instructed that he be paired with a “seasoned senior judge” in a division bench, in a move seen as an institutional reprimand aimed at remedial learning.“Such absurd and erroneous orders are unpardonable,” the top court observed. “We have been constrained to issue directions…keeping in mind that the impugned order is not the only erroneous order of the concerned judge that we have looked into for the first time. Many such erroneous orders have been looked into by us...,” noted the court, indicating a pattern of concern regarding the judge’s decisions.Following the Supreme Court order, the high court made interim changes to its roster, assigning Justice Kumar to sit with a senior judge on a division bench while assigning the criminal roster to a different judge.The sharp language and sweeping directives triggered a debate in legal circles, especially regarding the propriety of the Supreme Court directly influencing bench composition and roster management of high courts.While the Supreme Court remains empowered to intervene in exceptional circumstances, it has historically exercised caution in issuing directions that touch upon the autonomy of constitutional courts.At least 13 judges of the Allahabad high court wrote to Chief Justice Arun Bhansali on Thursday, urging him to convene a full court meeting to consider disregarding directions issued by the Supreme Court in its August 4 order.In his letter, Justice Arindam Sinha, writing in his personal capacity, invoked Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952, to circulate the proposal for signatures. The letter has garnered support and endorsement from at least 12 other judges. The letter said that the Supreme Court does not have administrative superintendence over the high court.