Scandalous: Supreme Court expunges Punjab and Haryana High Court judge’s remarks

Satya Prakash

Advertisement

Tribune News Service

New Delhi, August 7

Terming it “absolutely unwarranted”, “wholly unnecessary” and “a matter of great concern”, the Supreme Court on Wednesday expunged the critical comments made by Justice Rajbir Sehrawat of the Punjab and Haryana High Court against it for staying contempt proceedings in a case pending before his Bench.

“Compliance with the orders passed by the Supreme Court is not a matter of choice but a matter of bounden constitutional obligation. Parties may be aggrieved by an order. Judges are, however, never aggrieved by an order passed by a higher constitutional or appellate court,” a five-judge Special Bench led by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud said.

“Whether individual judges are in agreement with merits or otherwise of an order passed by a superior court is besides the point. Every judge is bound by discipline…,” it noted. “Justice Rajbir Sehrawat has made observations with regard to the SC, which are a matter of grave concern...Judicial discipline in the context of the hierarchical nature of the judicial system is intended to preserve the dignity of all institutions, whether at the level of the district courts or HCs or the SC,” the CJI said, terming the judge’s comments “scandalous”. Such observations can cause incalculable harm to the sanctity of judicial process, the CJI added.

“We are of the view that in a situation where the authority of this court is sought to be undermined by gratuitous observations made by a single judge of the high court, it’s the plain constitutional function of this court to set right any attempts to dislocate the sanctity of judicial hierarchy in the maintenance of judicial discipline,” the Bench said, expunging Justice Sehrawat’s controversial remarks.

The SC, however, chose not to issue a notice to Justice Sehrawat despite top law officers of the government terming his observations an “aggravated form of contempt”.

“We would have been inclined to issue a notice to the single judge of the HC…but, doing so would place the judge in a situation of being subject to a judicial adjudication or inquiry by this court, which we are inclined to desist from at this stage,” the Bench said.

“Though there is merit in the submissions of the learned Attorney General for India and the Solicitor General of India, we are inclined to exercise a degree of restraint in pursuing any further course of action based on the observations of the learned single judge (Justice Sehrawat),” it said.

It also took note of the fact that a Division Bench led by the Chief Justice of the HC had already stayed Justice Sehrawat’s July 17 order. “We are pained by the observations made by the single judge of the Punjab and Haryana HC. The observations are made with regard to an order passed by the SC,” said the Bench, which had on Tuesday taken suo motu cognisance of Justice Sehrawat’s comments made in his July 17 order.

“Such observations tend to bring the entire judicial machinery into disrepute. This affects not only the dignity of this court but of the HCs as well,” said the Bench, which also included Justice Sanjiv Khanna, Justice BR Gavai, Justice Surya Kant and Justice Hrishikesh Roy.

The SC said greater caution was expected from Justice Sehrawat in future in dealing with orders of the SC and the high court Division Bench.

In his July 17 order, Justice Sehrawat had stated that the SC had the tendency to presume it was more “supreme” than it actually was and to presume a HC to be less “high” than it constitutionally was.

Compliance not a matter of choice

Compliance with the orders passed by the Supreme Court is not a matter of choice but a matter of bounden constitutional obligation. — Five-judge Special Bench