The perception of the common man about the credentials and background of the judicial officer is vital, the Supreme Court observed while upholding non-appointment of a candidate to a post of judicial officer on the ground of the absence of 'honorable acquittal' in criminal cases. The bench of Justices KM Joseph and PS Narasimha observed that the most suitable persons should be occupying the post of a judicial officer, as they have performed the most important functions of the State.
In this case, the candidate, who applied to the post of civil judge, voluntarily revealed that he was implicated in certain criminal cases. The Full Court of the Rajasthan High Court noted that offenses in all the cases he was involved in were serious in nature and acquittals were not clean. Thus, his candidature was rejected following which he filed a writ petition before the High Court. Allowing his petition, the High Court on its judicial side observed that offenses under Section 323 and 324 IPC could not have been treated at par with other heinous offenses. The denial of appointment was found unsustainable and unconstitutional.
In an appeal filed by the Rajasthan High Court administrative side, the Apex court bench noted that the post of a judicial officer at any level of the hierarchy involves applying the most exacting standards. It is through the Civil Judge (Junior Division)/Magistrate that the common man has the greatest interface.
The post of a Civil Judge or a Magistrate is of the highest importance notwithstanding the fact that in the pyramidical structure of the judiciary, the Civil Judge or the Magistrate is at the lowest rung. We say this for the reason that of all the litigation which is instituted in the country, the highest volume of the same takes place at the lowest level. Not many of the cases finally reach the highest Court. It is through the Civil Judge (Junior Division)/Magistrate that the common man has the greatest interface.
In the absence of an honorable acquittal, the alleged involvement of an officer in criminal cases may undermine public faith in the system.
Most importantly, the perception of the common man about the credentials and background of the judicial officer is vital. We have only highlighted these aspects as a prelude to considering the facts of the case further. In other words, in the absence of an honorable acquittal, the alleged involvement of an officer in criminal cases may undermine public faith in the system.
Citation: LL 2021 SC 494
Case Name: Rajasthan High Court vs. Akashdeep Morya
Case no. | Date: CA 5733 OF 2021 | 16 September 2021
Coram: Justices KM Joseph and PS Narasimha
Counsel: Sr. Adv Meenakshi Arora for the appellant, Adv Karan Singh Bhati for respondent