NEW DELHI: Enraged by what it termed "one of the worst and most erroneous orders we have come across", Supreme Court has pulled up Allahabad HC's Justice Prashant Kumar for allowing criminal proceedings in a civil dispute case. Questioning Kumar's competence in deciding criminal cases , SC, in an unprecedented order, directed he shouldn't be given any criminal case for adjudication till he retires, and must be made to sit with a seasoned judge of the HC in a division bench.
"The judge 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's wrong with judiciary at the level of HC," Justices J B Pardiwala and R Mahadevan said.
SC: Passing of such absurd & erroneous orders unpardonable
SC said at times "we are left wondering whether such orders are passed on some extraneous considerations or it is sheer ignorance of law. Whatever it be, passing of such absurd and erroneous orders is unpardonable". It said the erroneous order was not an exception as Justice Kumar had passed similarly unpardonable ones over a period of time, which left them with no option but to take the extreme step.
The case pertains to sale of goods and payment between two businessmen. The seller had delivered goods worth Rs 52.34 lakh out of which he was paid Rs 47.75 lakh. As the balance amount was not paid, he lodged a criminal case, leading to the other businessman to move HC for quashing the case.
While allowing criminal proceedings in the case, a single bench of Justice Kumar justified his decision, saying that the complainant would not be in a position to pursue the civil litigation as it will take years and he will have to put more money to pursue the litigation. "To be more precise, it would seem like good money chasing bad money. If this court allows the matter to be referred to civil court on account of civil dispute between the parties, it would amount to travesty of justice and O.P. no.2 (complainant) would suffer irreparable loss and he might even not be in a position to emerge from the financial constraints to pursue the matter," he had said.
Expressing shock over the stand taken by the judge the SC bench said, "Is it the understanding of the high court that ultimately if the accused is convicted, the trial court would award him the balance amount? The observations recorded... are shocking. It is an extremely sad day for one and all to read the observations... It was expected of the high court to know the well-settled position of law that in cases of civil dispute a complainant cannot be permitted to resort to criminal proceedings as the same would amount to abuse of process of law.
"It was expected of the HC to understand the nature of the allegations levelled in the complaint. In substance the HC has said in so many words that the criminal proceedings instituted by the complainant in a case of pure civil dispute is justified because it may take considerable time for the complainant to recover the balance amount by preferring a civil suit," it said.
The bench quashed the order and directed that the case be reconsidered by the HC but by another judge.
"The chief justice of the high court shall immediately withdraw the present criminal determination from the judge concerned. The chief justice shall make the judge concerned sit in a division bench with a seasoned senior judge of the HC. We further direct that the judge concerned shall not be assigned any criminal determination, till he demits office. If at all he is to be made to sit as a single judge, he shall not be assigned any criminal determination," the apex court said.
"The judge 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's wrong with judiciary at the level of HC," Justices J B Pardiwala and R Mahadevan said.
SC: Passing of such absurd & erroneous orders unpardonable
SC said at times "we are left wondering whether such orders are passed on some extraneous considerations or it is sheer ignorance of law. Whatever it be, passing of such absurd and erroneous orders is unpardonable". It said the erroneous order was not an exception as Justice Kumar had passed similarly unpardonable ones over a period of time, which left them with no option but to take the extreme step.
The case pertains to sale of goods and payment between two businessmen. The seller had delivered goods worth Rs 52.34 lakh out of which he was paid Rs 47.75 lakh. As the balance amount was not paid, he lodged a criminal case, leading to the other businessman to move HC for quashing the case.
While allowing criminal proceedings in the case, a single bench of Justice Kumar justified his decision, saying that the complainant would not be in a position to pursue the civil litigation as it will take years and he will have to put more money to pursue the litigation. "To be more precise, it would seem like good money chasing bad money. If this court allows the matter to be referred to civil court on account of civil dispute between the parties, it would amount to travesty of justice and O.P. no.2 (complainant) would suffer irreparable loss and he might even not be in a position to emerge from the financial constraints to pursue the matter," he had said.
Expressing shock over the stand taken by the judge the SC bench said, "Is it the understanding of the high court that ultimately if the accused is convicted, the trial court would award him the balance amount? The observations recorded... are shocking. It is an extremely sad day for one and all to read the observations... It was expected of the high court to know the well-settled position of law that in cases of civil dispute a complainant cannot be permitted to resort to criminal proceedings as the same would amount to abuse of process of law.
"It was expected of the HC to understand the nature of the allegations levelled in the complaint. In substance the HC has said in so many words that the criminal proceedings instituted by the complainant in a case of pure civil dispute is justified because it may take considerable time for the complainant to recover the balance amount by preferring a civil suit," it said.
The bench quashed the order and directed that the case be reconsidered by the HC but by another judge.
"The chief justice of the high court shall immediately withdraw the present criminal determination from the judge concerned. The chief justice shall make the judge concerned sit in a division bench with a seasoned senior judge of the HC. We further direct that the judge concerned shall not be assigned any criminal determination, till he demits office. If at all he is to be made to sit as a single judge, he shall not be assigned any criminal determination," the apex court said.
You may also like
Mum of Israeli hostage Evyatar David delivers blistering message to Hamas apologists
Microsoft-Nayara Energy Case Exposes India Inc's Cloud Vulnerability
Little-known UK wildlife park named among the best in Europe
Brits warned of swimwear rules that could land them £434 fines in holiday hotspots
You'll need 20/20 vision to spot hidden dogs among sea of cats
