In Brief
An Additional District and Sessions Judge challenged adverse remarks made against him by the Delhi High Court in a judgment expunging remarks he had made against police officers during an anticipatory bail hearing. The Supreme Court held that while superior courts can criticize erroneous orders, they must avoid personal criticism of judicial officers' conduct unless the officer is heard and such criticism is essential to the decision. The Court found that the High Court's remarks describing the judge's approach as a "judicial misadventure" and advising circumspection were improper and violated principles of natural justice. It emphasized that personal adverse observations cause irreparable harm to a judge's career and dignity. The Court allowed the appeal and expunged the offending remarks, clarifying that criticizing orders differs fundamentally from criticizing judges, and that conduct issues should be addressed through administrative rather than judicial channels.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.