Judiciary:
Maharashtra Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1979: r.‘5’ – Major penalties – Quantum of punishment – Justification of – Allegation that judicial officer had proximate relationship with a lady lawyer – Certain judicial orders passed in favour of lawyers’ clients, her relatives – Dismissal order of judicial officer – Upheld by the courts below – On appeal, held: Officer decided the cases because of his proximate relationship with a lady lawyer and not because the law required him to do so – This is also gratification of a different kind – Judicial Officer concerned did not live upto the expectations of integrity, behavior and probity expected of him – His conduct is as such that no leniency can be shown – Thus, the punishment of dismissal from service was justified. Judicial officer – Standard of conduct – Expectation of – Held: Judge is judged by his quality of judgments as also by the quality and purity of his character – Impeccable integrity should be reflected both in public and personal life of a Judge – One who stands in judgments over others should be incorruptible – That is the high standard which is expected of Judges.
Dismissing the appeal, the Court
HELD: 1.1 The first and foremost quality required in a Judge is integrity. The need of integrity in the judiciary is much higher than in other institutions. The judiciary is an institution whose foundations are based on honesty and integrity. It is, therefore, necessary that judicial officers should possess the sterling quality of integrity. The behavior of a Judge has to be of an exacting standard, both inside and outside the Court. Judges are also public servants. A Judge should always remember that he is there to serve the public. A Judge is judged not only by his quality of judgments but also by the quality and purity of his character. Impeccable integrity should be reflected both in public and personal life of a Judge. One who stands in judgments over others should be incorruptible. That is the high standard which is expected of Judges. Judges must remember that they are not merely employees but hold high public office. A judge must decide the case only on the basis of the facts on record and the law applicable to the case. If a judge decides a case for any extraneous reasons then he is not performing his duty in accordance with law. The word ‘gratification’ does not only mean monetary gratification. Gratification can be of various types. It can be gratification of money, gratification of power, gratification of lust etc.,etc. [Para 6-11][112-D, F, H; 113-A-B, F-G]
1.2 In the instant case, the officer decided the cases because of his proximate relationship with a lady lawyer and not because the law required him to do so. This is also gratification of a different kind. The Judicial Officer concerned did not live upto the expectations of integrity, behavior and probity expected of him. His conduct is as such that no leniency can be shown and he cannot be visited with a lesser punishment.[Para 11, 12] [113-H; 114-A]
Tarak Singh v. JyotiBasu (2005) 1 SCC 201; Daya Shankar v. High Court of Allahabad and Others (1987)
3 SCC 19; R. C. Chandel v. High Court of Madhya Pradesh (2012) 8 SCC 58 - referred to.
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.