LexIN RE: ORDER OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT DATED 17.07.2024 AND ANCILLARY ISSUES versus
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2024] 8 S.C.R. 949 : 2024 INSC 594 In Re: Order of Punjab and Haryana High Court dated 17.07.2024 and Ancillary Issues (Suo Motu Writ (Civil) No. 8 of 2024) 07 August 2024 [Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud,* CJI, Sanjiv Khanna, B.R. Gavai, Surya Kant and Hrishikesh Roy, JJ.] Issue for Consideration Whether gratuitous observations passed by a Judge of a High Court regarding previous orders of the Supreme Court, undermine the authority of the Supreme Court and should therefore be expunged? Headnotes† Suo moto proceedings initiated by Supreme Court – Observations made in an order by Judge of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana on the Supreme Court found to be a matter of grave concern – Totally unnecessary for the ultimate order passed – Gratuitous observations on previous orders passed by the Supreme Court or for that matter in the course of the same proceedings absolutely unwarranted – Observations to be expunged from the order – Greater caution to be exercised in the future while dealing with orders of the Supreme Court and by the Division Bench of the High Court: Held: 1. In an order dated 17.01.2024, a Judge of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana made certain observations regarding the Supreme Court of India – These observations were found to be a matter of grave concern and totally unnecessary for the ultimate order passed – Held that such observations tend to bring the entire judicial machinery into disrepute, and affects not only the dignity of the Supreme Court, but of the High Courts as well – Necessity of judicial discipline and respect for the hierarchical structure of the judiciary underscored – Intended to preserve the dignity of all institutions, whether at the level of District, High Court or Supreme Court. [Paras 4 and 6] 2. Compliance with orders passed by the Supreme Court is not a matter of choice, but a matter of bounden constitutional obligation, given the structure of the Indian legal system and the authority of * Author 950 [2024] 8 S.C.R. Digital Supreme Court Reports the Supreme Court which heads the process of judicial adjudication of the country. [Para 4] 3. Plain function of the Supreme Court to set right any attempt to dislocate the sanctity of judicial authority and maintenance of judicial discipline – Observations made by Judge in order dated 17.07.2024 expunged – Greater caution expected to be exercised in the future while dealing with orders of the Supreme Court and of the Division Bench of the High Court. [Para 8] 4. Whether individual judges are in agreement with the merits or otherwise of an order passed by a superior court is beside the point – Every Judge is bound by the discipline which the hierarchical nature of the judicial system imposes within the system – No Judge is personally affected by the orders passed either by the Division Bench of the High Court or, as the case may be, by the Supreme Court. [Para 8] 5. In an age where there is widespread reporting of every Court proceeding, particularly in the context of live streaming which is intended to provide access to justice to citizens, it is all the more necessary that Judges should exercise due restraint and responsibility in the observations which are made in the course of proceedings sanctity of judicial process can be caused incalculable harm. [Para 9] Notice not issued to Judge as it would put him in a situation of being subject to a judicial adjudication or inquiry by this Court. [Para 10] Case Law Cited Tirupati Balaji Developers (P) Ltd. v. State of Bihar (2004) 5 SCC 1 – followed. List of Keywords Contempt of Court; Contempt Proceeding; Judicial Discipline; Hierarchical Nature; Gratuitous Observation; Bounden Constitutional Obligation; Suo Motu Notice; Judicial Authority; Access to Justice; Sanctity of Judicial Process. Case Arising From CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: Suo Motu Writ (Civil) No. 8 of 2024 (Under Article 32 of The Constitution of India) [2024] 8 S.C.R. 951 In Re: Order of Punjab and Haryana High Court dated 17.07.2024 and Ancillary Issues Appearances for Parties By Courts Motion. R. Venkataramani, Attorney General, Tushar Mehta, SG, Lokesh Sinhal, Sr. AAG, Kanu Agrawal, Advs. for the Respondent. Judgment / Order of the Supreme Court Judgment Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, CJI 1. The Court has taken up these proceedings suo motu in the context of an order dated 17 July 2024 passed by Justice Rajbir Sehrawat, Judge of the High Court of Punjab an
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.