In a rare and candid moment, Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant on Thursday acknowledged instances of judicial impropriety, warning of a growing pattern where some judges pass a flurry of orders for extraneous considerations just before retirement.
The sharp observation came from a Supreme Court bench led by CJI Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi, as it heard a petition filed by a principal district judge from Madhya Pradesh who was suspended barely days before his scheduled retirement.
Supreme Court Flags an “Unfortunate Trend”
Calling the pattern deeply concerning, the bench remarked on what it described as an “unfortunate trend” of judicial officers attempting to “hit sixes” on the eve of retirement.
“Petitioner just before retirement started hitting sixes. It is an unfortunate trend. I do not want to elaborate on it,” the bench observed, signalling discomfort without delving into specifics.
The case brought to light a broader issue that the top court suggested was no longer isolated, raising uncomfortable questions about judicial accountability at the twilight of a judge’s career.
Suspension Days Before Retirement
The petitioner, a principal district judge, was originally set to retire on November 30. However, he was suspended on November 19, just 10 days before retirement, allegedly in connection with two judicial orders he had passed.
A day later, on November 20, the Supreme Court directed the Madhya Pradesh government to defer his retirement by one year. This followed the state’s decision to increase the retirement age of its employees to 62 years.
Taking a pointed jibe at the situation, CJI Surya Kant noted that the officer was unaware of the retirement age extension when he issued the disputed orders. “The judicial officer did not know, when he passed those two orders, that his retirement age had been increased by one year. There is a growing trend of judges passing so many orders just before retirement,” the CJI remarked.
Why Bypass the High Court?
The bench also questioned the judge’s decision to directly approach the Supreme Court instead of first challenging his suspension before the high court. Responding to this, the petitioner’s counsel explained that since the suspension stemmed from a full court decision, the officer believed that approaching the apex court would ensure a fair hearing.
Senior advocate Vipin Sanghi, appearing for the judicial officer, highlighted his client’s “impressive career” and strong record, noting that he had consistently received very good ratings in his annual confidential reports.
Can Judges Be Suspended for Judicial Orders?
At the heart of the matter lay a critical legal question. Sanghi argued that judicial orders, even if flawed, are subject to appeal and correction by higher courts. “How can an officer be suspended for judicial orders which can be appealed against and rectified by the higher judiciary?” he asked.
The bench acknowledged this principle but drew a sharp distinction. “Disciplinary proceedings cannot be initiated against a judicial officer for passing orders which are erroneous. He cannot be suspended for this. But if the orders are palpably dishonest?” the court observed, leaving the implication clear.
Supreme Court Declines to Entertain Plea
Noting that several full court decisions have previously been overturned by high courts on the judicial side, the Supreme Court declined to entertain the petition. Instead, it directed the suspended judge to approach the high court for relief.
The bench also expressed disapproval over the officer’s attempt to seek details of his suspension through Right to Information (RTI) applications. “He could have submitted a representation in this regard. It is not expected of a senior judicial officer to resort to the RTI route to get information,” the court said.
