Rajasthan Judicial Officer Facing 'Serious Allegations' In 6 Cases Moves High Court Against Suspension Order

A Judicial Officer has moved the Rajasthan High Court to challenge his recent suspension, which was initiated following a preliminary inquiry into "serious allegations" against him in six separate cases.

Judicial Officer Rajendra Sahu, who was serving as an Additional District and Sessions Judge (ADJ) in Bhinmal, Jalore district, was suspended last month under the orders of HC's Acting Chief Justice Sanjeev Prakash Sharma.

As per the official order, the administrative action was taken as a precautionary measure to ensure a fair probe and prevent the officer from influencing the ongoing inquiry.

The order issued by the Registrar General states that the Acting Chief Justice exercised powers conferred by Rule 13 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1958, read with a Full Court Resolution dated October 30, 1971, to place the officer under suspension with immediate effect.

In his writ petition challenging the action, Judge Sahu contends that the Acting Chief Justice is not the competent authority to issue a suspension order pending an inquiry.

The plea argues that, in accordance with the relevant service rules and Article 233 of the Constitution, only the Governor has the authority to issue an order of suspension for a judicial officer.

Furthermore, the petition avers that a suspension order can be passed only pursuant to a regular inquiry, not at the stage of a preliminary inquiry, which is merely a fact-finding inquiry. 

Hearing his plea last month, a division bench of Justice Pushpendra Singh Bhati and Justice Sandeep Shah directed the counsel for the High Court to seek formal instructions in the matter.

The case will now be heard on April 15.

It may be noted that, quoting Bhinmal Bar Association Secretary Shravan Dhaka, PTI recently reported that the Bar had previously submitted complaints against Judge Sahu. The complaints alleged misbehaviour towards advocates and that instances of "serious nature of non-professionalism and unethical practices" were also alleged against him.