SC laments attitude of HC judges not following top court reminders, terms it distressing

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday expressed its concern over the thought patterns of various high court judges in the country who it observed tended to lower the image of the judiciary.

Justices Dipankar Datta and P K Mishra observed it was a distressing trend and expressed surprise at the repeated reminders of the top court having little effect on high courts judges besides its decisions being persistently ignored.

The apex court, as a result, observed despite the burden of work on high court judges, who had been "performing commendably" faced with the odds, instances such as the one at hand, was an aberration, bringing disrepute to the judicial system and showing the entire judiciary in poor light.

"In recent times, on more occasions than one, this court has suo motu initiated proceedings having noticed attitudinal and thought patterns of the learned judges of various high courts across the country which tended to lower the image of the judiciary in general and the high courts in particular," the bench said.

The top court said for a judge to deviate from the laid down standards would be to betray the trust reposed in him by the nation.

"We sincerely hope that the learned judges of the high courts while being careful and cautious will remain committed to the service of the litigants, for whom they exist, as well as the oath of office that they have taken so that, in future, we are not presented with another case of similar nature to deal with," the bench said.

The apex court was hearing a plea that alleged a Gujarat High Court judge hadn't pronounced the order after hearing the lawyer's submissions on March 1, 2023 and the IT Cell of the High Court gave the petitioner a soft copy of a reasoned order on April 30, 2024, a year later.

The bench noted the Gujarat High Court had egregiously breached the law in this case .

"From the proceedings of the court of the learned judge available on the virtual platform, it is patently clear that his lordship did not even express that the 'reasons would follow' for the dismissal of the petition," it said.

The top court underscored assuming the judge were to express that the reasons for the dismissal would follow, there was no valid reason to write a detailed, reasoned order after a one-year lapse after saying “dismissed” and uploading the order on the website.

The court said it persuaded to think the duty and responsibility of assigning reasons for dismissal of the petition completely escaped the mind of the Judge.

"Perhaps, there is hardly any individual, including any judge, who can truly claim to have committed no mistake in his life. It is a feature of human fallibility that people are prone to commit mistakes. It is how, lessons individuals learn from mistakes, which facilitate in putting the past behind for moving forward," it said.

The court further opined keeping in mind the highest standards of fairness, propriety and discipline, the need of the hour required the judge to bring the matter back on board once again, recall the verbal order of dismissal and place it before the chief justice of the high court for assigning it to some other bench for a fresh consideration.

The top court said in today's world, when more and more people were showing interest in court proceedings, with there being a wide coverage on social media platforms, judges were at the centre of attention equally.

"The society expects every judge of a high court, so to speak, to be a model of rectitude, an epitome of unimpeachable integrity and unwavering principles, a champion of moral excellence, and an embodiment of professionalism, who can consistently deliver work of high-quality guaranteeing justice," said the top court.

However, taking a lenient view towards the judge in question, the bench revived the petition of the appellant and restored it on the high court's file.