{"id":269812,"date":"2022-07-08T11:00:14","date_gmt":"2022-07-08T05:30:14","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=269812"},"modified":"2022-07-14T14:46:10","modified_gmt":"2022-07-14T09:16:10","slug":"jk-and-ladakh-hc-for-proper-administration-of-justice-judges-should-not-make-derogatory-remarks-against-persons-unless-such-censuring-is-necessary-for-the-case","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/07\/08\/jk-and-ladakh-hc-for-proper-administration-of-justice-judges-should-not-make-derogatory-remarks-against-persons-unless-such-censuring-is-necessary-for-the-case\/","title":{"rendered":"J&K and Ladakh HC| For proper administration of justice, Judges should not make derogatory remarks against persons, unless such censuring is necessary for the case"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

\n

\u201cHigher the forum and greater the powers, the greater is the need for restraint\u201d<\/p>\n

Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court<\/span>: While allowing the instant petition wherein the aggrieved party invoked the jurisdiction of the Court under Section 482<\/a> CrPC<\/a>, seeking to expunge the adverse remarks, observations and directions made by the Additional Sessions Judge, Jammu; the bench of Mohan Lal, J., observed that for proper administration of justices, judges must remember the general principle of highest importance that, derogatory remarks are not to be made against persons, unless such censuring of conduct is absolutely necessary for the case. \u201cThe Judge’s Bench is a seat of power and has absolute and unchallengeable control of the court domain, but they cannot misuse their authority by intemperate comments, undignified banter or scathing criticism of counsel, parties or witnesses<\/i>\u201d.<\/p>\n

Facts of the case<\/span>: The petitioner who is the Dy. Superintendent of Police (HQ), Kishtwar, was handling investigation in several cases filed under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act<\/a> and Arms Act<\/a>. Upon completion of investigation in one of the cases [FIR No. 01\/2020], the matter was presented before the Trial Court. In the impugned order dated 02-06-2021, the Additional Sessions Judge, after framing the charges, went on to make certain observations regarding the conduct of investigation into the matter with particular focus on the petitioner. The Judge noted that, \u201cduring investigation I\/O\/petitioner has conducted the investigation in a lethargic and sluggish manner (\u2026) much better investigation could be conducted by even a Head Constable in comparison to I\/O (\u2026) I am quite surprised that how Mr. Sunny Gupta, Dy. SP has qualified the administrative examination of the state and become Dy. SP in the police department\u201d.<\/i><\/p>\n

Aggrieved by the afore-stated remarks, the petitioner knocked on the doors of the High Court.<\/p>\n

Contentions:<\/p>\n