'Order Appears To Be Passed Due To Personal Grudge And Malevolence': Gujarat High Court Criticizes Trial Judge For Exceeding Jurisdiction

In a recent ruling, the Gujarat High Court has criticized a lower court judge for issuing an order to file a First Information Report (FIR) against a Police Inspector (PI) without the appropriate authority.Justice JC Doshi, presiding over the case, expressed bewilderment at the actions of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, stating, “this Court fails to understand in which capacity and under which power learned Additional Sessions Judge has authority to direct State to file FIR against serving Police Inspector. Section 197 of Cr.P.C. provides that no Government Officer would be prosecuted without prior permission of the State. What further appears that learned Additional Sessions Judge also ordered to initiate departmental proceedings for dismissing him from service or to suspend him with immediate effect. Transfer of petitioner is also directed by learned Additional Sessions Judge.”The High Court observed that the order appeared to be motivated by personal grudges rather than judicial discretion, with Justice Doshi remarking, “This order appears to be passed due to personal grudge and malevolence. Power to transfer, suspend, initiate departmental inquiry or dismissal can be passed by appointing authority. In inquiry, further strange order is passed giving liberty to respondent no.2 herein to file appropriate litigation claiming compensation for keeping him in illegal custody. This Court really doubts whether learned Additional Sessions Judge was exercising judicial discretion or whether impugned order is passed under judicial discipline,” Justice Doshi added.Justice Doshi also said that it appeared that 'personal vendetta' had taken cause for conducting an inquiry which was completely without jurisdiction.The ruling stemmed from a Revision Application challenging the order passed by the 6th Additional Sessions Judge of Deesa, Banaskantha. The accused in the case had been arrested outside the courthouse premises, prompting an inquiry by the Additional Sessions Judge under Section 202 of the Cr.P.C.Critically, the High Court questioned the authority of the Additional Sessions Judge to initiate such an inquiry, emphasizing the jurisdictional propriety that every court must adhere to. The Court stated, “Every Court including learned Additional Sessions Judge is bound to follow such judicial and jurisdictional propriety. Whims and Caprices of Judge have no place in judicial decision. Pages and pages are penned by learned Additional Sessions Judge to conduct inquiry for which he has not authority or not been empowered.""Prima facie, it appears that learned Sessions Judge has exceeded its jurisdiction and passed order which are not called for. Impugned order being foible and its fallibility could be envisioned. Personal score appears to be settled,” the Court added.The High Court restrained itself from passing further orders at the admission stage of the Revision Application, granting interim relief until further orders.“In view of above, the Revision Application deserves consideration. Rule. Learned APP waives service of rule on behalf of respondent – State and learned advocate Mr.Verday waives service of rule on behalf of respondent no.2. Interim relief in terms of para - 8(c) is granted till further orders,” the Court concluded.Case Title: Vijaysingh Meghsingh Chaudhary Versus State Of Gujarat & Anr.LL Citation: 2024 Livelaw (Guj) 44 Click Here To Read The Judgement

'Order Appears To Be Passed Due To Personal Grudge And Malevolence': Gujarat High Court Criticizes Trial Judge For Exceeding Jurisdiction

Bhavya Singh

Tags