In Brief
A judicial officer of the Gujarat High Court challenged his dismissal from service following disciplinary inquiries into his conduct while trying customs smuggling cases. The Court upheld the finding that he committed misconduct by awarding sentences far below the statutory minimum prescribed under the Customs Act 1962 and structuring them so convicted smugglers would not serve additional jail time. However, the Court reduced the punishment from dismissal to compulsory retirement, considering his record and age at superannuation. The judgment clarified that disciplinary inquiries need not follow strict criminal evidence rules, and inferences of misconduct can be drawn from patterns of conduct indicating decisions were not honest exercises of judicial power.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.