Practice and Procedure – Adverse remarks – Expunction of: Held : Remarks adverse in nature, should not be passed in ordinary circumstances, or unless absolutely necessary for proper adjudication of the case at hand – Impugned directions were passed upon an incorrect and erroneous appreciation of the record – The record does not support the prime facie view taken in regard to ante-dating or interpolation of the despatch register – The register records multiple entries in different hand, script, and language – There is neither any cutting, overwriting nor any interpolation – A glance at the relevant page of the despatch register makes it clear that the entry at the said page starts from Sl No.2026 and ends at Sl No.2043 and the despatch of the communication in question to the respondent falls at Sl No. 2032 which is in the middle of the page – Therefore, the question of any interpolation/tampering does not arise – The concerned Officer was not to be benefitted in any manner in ante-dating the communication dtd.21.10.2010, as the said date was still beyond the period of 10 days initially granted by the High Court to unseal the premises of the respondent, vide order dtd. 27.09.2010 – Impugned directions totally misplaced, more so, when the endeavour of the Officer was to bring the offenders to book and save evasion of duty, mandatorily required to be paid by the assessee – Observation made and the directions issued by the High Court vide impugned order, expunged – Proceedings initiated pursuant thereto, if any, including the FIR stand closed with immediate effect. [Paras 9, 10, 12, 13, 20 and 21] Practice and Procedure – Adverse remarks – Tests laid down in State of UP v. Mohammad Naim (four-Judge Bench) – Non-fulfilment of: Held : Order of the High Court does not qualify the tests laid down by this Court in State of UP v. Mohammad Naim in regards to passing remarks against a person, whose conduct is being scrutinised – Neither was the officer made party to the dispute, nor was he given an opportunity to show cause, and further, nothing on record reflected the officer holding an animus against the respondent, before such adverse directions were passed against him – Remarks by a court should at all times be governed by the principles of justice, fair play and restraint – Words employed should reflect sobriety, moderation and reserve – Impugned directions issued by the High Court in registration of criminal investigation against an officer against the settled principles of law have a demoralizing effect on the well-meaning officers of the State. [Paras 14, 16, 18.2 and 20]
Practice and Procedure – Adverse remarks – Power to expunge – Exercise of, by the High Court and Supreme Court – Discussed.[Paras 19.1-19.3.1]
LIST OF CITATIONS AND OTHER REFERENCES
State of UP v. Mohammad Naim AIR 1964 SC 703 : [1964] SCR
363 – relied on.
R. K. Lakshmanan v. A. K. Srinivasan (1975) 2 SCC 466 : [1976] 1 SCR 204; S. K. Viswambaran v. E. Koyakunju (1987) 2 SCC 109 : [1987] 2 SCR 501; Samya Seet v. Shambhu Sarkar (2005) 6 SCC 767 : [2005] 2 Suppl. SCR 686; State of Madhya Pradesh v. Narmada Bachao Andolan (2011)
12 SCC 689 : [2011] 11 SCR 678; K. G. Shanti v. United Indian Insurance Co. Ltd and Ors. (2021) 5 SCC 511; Niranjan Patnaik v. Sashibhusan Kar (1986) 2 SCC 569 : [1986] 2 SCR 470; Abani Kanta Ray v. State of Orissa (1995) 4 Suppl. SCC 169 : [1995] 4 Suppl. SCR 333; A. M. Mathur v. Pramod Kumar Gupta (1990) 2 SCC 533 : [1990] 2 SCR 110; Shivajirao Nilangekar Patil v. Mahesh Madhav Gosavi (1987) 1 SCC 227 : [1987] 1 SCR 458; Dr. Raghubir Saran v. State of Bihar AIR 1964 SC 1 : [1964] SCR 336; Panchanan Banerji v. Upendra Nath Bhattacharji AIR 1927 All 193; Manu Sharma v. State (NCT of Delhi) (2010) 6 SCC 1 : [2010] 4 SCR
103 – referred to.
M/s Shikha Trading Co. v. The State of Punjab and Anr. CWP No. 19909 of 2010 dated 08.12.2010 – referred to.
OTHER CASE DETAILS INCLUDING IMPUGNED
ORDER AND APPEARANCES
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.