In Brief
A judicial officer on probation was discharged in 2016 after a departmental inquiry over a bail order he granted in a corruption case, despite the Higher Judicial Committee not recommending confirmation. The High Court upheld the discharge as non-punitive. The Supreme Court reversed this, holding that where an inquiry into alleged misconduct is initiated, discharge becomes punitive and triggers Article 311(2) protections requiring a full inquiry. The officer's ACRs were consistently good, with no adverse remarks except regarding the contested bail. The bail order was within his competence under law; no evidence of extraneous motive existed, and the prosecution failed to inform him of the High Court's prior rejection. Mere suspicion and negligence do not constitute misconduct. The Court reinstated the officer with 50% backwages and full consequential benefits.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.