Allow Cookies!
By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
Krishna Prasad Verma (D) Thr Lrs v State of Bihar and Ors.
Charges against Krishna Prasad Verma , a judicial officer in the State of Bihar . He was functioning as an Additional Distt. & Sessions Judge in the State of Bihar
Judgement of Supreme Court
Reagrding charge 1 , the Court held that
As far as the first charge is concerned, a major fact, which was not considered by the enquiry officer, the disciplinary authority as well as the High Court was that the Additional Public Prosecutor, who had appeared behalf of the State had not opposed the prayer of the accused for grant of bail.........It would be important to mention that it seems that later it was brought to the notice of the appellant that he had not taken note of the order of the High Court while granting bail on 11.07.2002. Thereafter, he issued notice to all the three accused on 23.08.2002 i.e. within less than two months and cancelled the bail granted to all the three accused on 11.07.2002.
Thus the Court found that the judicial officer was not guilty as of the first charge.
Regarding charge 2 the Court hekd that
The appellant, a Special Judge, closed the evidence of the prosecution which resulted in material witnesses not being examined and consequently the accused was acquitted. As far as this allegation is concerned, the enquiry officer on the basis of the statements of two 9 clerks of the Court has made lengthy observations that the appellant did not send any communication to the Superintendent of Police, the District Magistrate and other authorities to ensure the production of the witnesses. According to the enquiry officer, this being a serious matter, the evidence should not have been closed and the appellant should have made efforts to approach the senior officials to get the witnesses produced. The Code of Criminal Procedure or the NDPS Act do not provide for any such procedure
The Court however clarified that it does not seek to provide legal immunity of any sort to judicial officers . It asserted that
We would, however, like to make it clear that we are in no manner indicating that if a judicial officer passes a wrong order, then no action is to be taken. In case a judicial officer passes orders which are against settled legal norms but there is no allegation of any extraneous influences leading to the passing of such orders then the appropriate action which the High Court should take is to record such material on the administrative side and place it on the service record of the judicial officer concerned
No doubt, if any judicial officer conducts proceedings in a manner which would reflect on his reputation or integrity or there is prima facie material to show reckless misconduct on his part while discharging his duties, the High Court would be entitled to initiate disciplinary cases but such material should be evident from the orders and should also be placed on record during the course of disciplinary proceedings.
86540
103860
630
114
59824