Live
- Three persons admitted to hospital for diarrhea treatment
- First Star Outside Milky Way Captured: WOH G64 is 2,000 Times Larger Than the Sun
- Sikkim govt to constitute state Niti Ayog: CM Tamang
- CBI books Rajasthan narcotics inspector for Rs 3 lakh bribe
- Rajasthan bypolls: A tough contest between BJP and Congress
- Albania joins SEPA, paving way for EU integration
- Japanese government approves 250-billion USD economic package to ease price pain
- Six pharma companies to set up their units in Telangana
- The Unstable Events of a 17-Wicket Day in Perth: India vs Australia
- Dutch FM's Israel trip cancelled after Netanyahu's arrest warrant
Supreme Court sets aside 'unjustified and illegal' remarks made against an advocate by Uttarakhand HC judge
Supreme Court of India
The Supreme Court has directed expunging "unjustified and illegal" remarks made by a judge of the Uttarakhand High Court against an advocate.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court has directed expunging "unjustified and illegal" remarks made by a judge of the Uttarakhand High Court against an advocate.
After going through the impugned orders from 2020 and 2021, a bench headed by Justice PS Narasimha said that "neither the conduct, nor the circumstances warranted recording of the remarks".
The Bench, also comprising Justice Sandeep Mehta, noted that the Uttarakhand High Court, in two interim orders, made certain remarks about the conduct of the appellant.
In one of its orders, the Uttarakhand HC had recorded the appellant advocate was available when the proceedings started but "he left the proceedings of the court without even expressing his courtesy of leaving the court to attend the proceedings in the other courts".
The apex court said: "We have gone through the orders dated 01-12-2020 and 07-12- 2021 and have carefully examined the circumstances in which the observations were made by the learned Judge. Having considered the observations made by the Judge, we are of the opinion that neither the conduct, nor the circumstances warranted recording of the remarks. These remarks are unjustified and illegal."
Further, it noted that the Supreme Court had, in similar circumstances, set aside all comments made by the same High Court judge against another practicing advocate.
In view of the fact that the perception of the same judge has already been noticed, we do not need to re-examine the approach adopted by the learned judge even in this case, it added.
"We disapprove the proclivity of the learned Judge of the High Court in making remarks against advocates for nothing so serious to take note of," the apex court said.
Allowing the appeal, it set aside the two orders “to the extent they relate to the conduct of the advocate” and directed expunging the remarks made against the appellant advocate.
