Citing 'Inaction' On Man's Relentless 'Malicious' Campaign, Bihar Judge Recuses From Case To Avoid 'Character Assassination'

In a sharply worded order passed on Monday, an Additional Sessions Judge in Bihar's Nawada district recused himself from hearing a criminal case, stating that he was "not prepared to undergo yet another cycle of harassment, pressure and character assassination". ASJ Suvash Chandra Sharma recused from the case after noting that the revisionist/petitioner before him had earlier (in a different case) engaged in a "relentless campaign" of 'baseless' and 'malicious' allegations which was compounded by the "complete inaction" of superior authorities against him despite a formal complaint made against his actions by way of a judicial order. Briefly put, a Criminal Revision plea (of 2022) was transferred to the court of Judge Sharma. Upon reviewing the file, the Court realised the petitioner was Shambhu Prasad, the self-styled 'Convenor' of a body named Bhrashtachar Mukti Morcha. The Court noted that Prasad was not a stranger to this courtroom, and he had previously appeared as a pairvikar in another case (Criminal Revision of 2024) alongside an associate named Birendra Chauhan. In the present matter, however, Prasad appeared as the petitioner himself. Judge Sharma noted both the individuals had earlier engaged in conduct that "gravely damaged the reputation, dignity, decorum, sanctity, and institutional prestige of the Court, including that of the presiding officer personally ". In fact, in the previous case in which Shambhu Prasad appeared as a pairvikar, Judge Sharma made specific observations in his order dated December 12, 2024. The said order had noted that both individuals employed a specific tactic. Whenever they failed to receive favourable orders, they would file baseless allegations and petitions branding judicial officers as corrupt, criminal and conspirators. The order had also noted that they "jeopardised the integrity of judicial officers and police authorities through their malicious actions" and even made derogatory remarks about the judicial officer in their revision petition. The order further noted that this strategy was not limited to a single court and that they also targeted a Judicial Magistrate (1st Class), police investigators and the Principal District & Sessions Judge, Nawada. In addition to this, they also circulated letters containing "unfounded, scandalous, and reckless allegations" to the highest authorities, including the Supreme Court of India, the Patna High Court, and the President of India. Noting their abovesaid behaviour, Judge Sharma, in his December 2024 order, sought actions against both individuals. However, even a year after the order, no action was taken, and, in a strange turn of events, the same individual appeared before the court again, though in a different case. Taking into account the petitioner's history, Judge Sharma deemed it appropriate to recuse himself from the present case. In his latest order (passed on December 8, 2025), Judge Sharma stated that in his previous order (of December 16, 2024), he had explicitly requested the High Court to take suo motu cognisance of the contempt committed by Prasad and Chauhan. Judge Sharma further noted, with evident distress, that even after nearly one year of such communication, no action had been taken against either of the two individuals, which emboldened them further and the complete ignorance of his earlier request (for action against both the individuals) had virtually placed him (Judge Sharma) on the "back foot". The latest order states thus: "This complete inaction has, in effect, emboldened them to such an extent that they now openly proclaim that the aspersions cast by them upon the Court and the presiding officer were correct and that the absence of disciplinary action by the superior authorities validates their accusations." Importantly, Judge Sharma expressed that he finds himself genuinely prejudiced against the petitioner due to the "prolonged inaction" and the prior conduct involving "scandalous, pejorative, derogatory, contemptuous and personal accusations". Thus, concluding that hearing the case would not be "conducive to judicial fairness", the judge stated thus: "I do not consider it just, proper, or conducive to judicial fairness for me to hear any matter pertaining to Shambhu Prasad or Birendra Chauhan during the entire tenure of my posting in this judgeship." The case file was thus directed to the Principal District & Sessions Judge, Nawada, with a request to recall the case and pass appropriate orders.

Citing 'Inaction' On Man's Relentless 'Malicious' Campaign, Bihar Judge Recuses From Case To Avoid 'Character Assassination'

Sparsh Upadhyay

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Sparsh Upadhyay

Citing 'Inaction' On Man's Relentless 'Malicious' Campaign, Bihar Judge Recuses From Case To Avoid 'Character Assassination'

Sparsh Upadhyay

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Sparsh Upadhyay

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers