Home »Top Stories » High court restrained from passing anti-judge strictures
The Supreme Court has held that high court should not pass strictures against a judge of the district judiciary in a judgment or summon the judge in judicial proceedings relating to his/her judgment, for public reprimand in open court.

The judgment authored by Justice Mansoor Ali Shah said that the course open to the high court is on the administrative side and the judge(s) of the high court hearing the case, can apprise the chief justice of the court through a confidential administrative note highlighting the grave illegalities, irregularities and improprieties noticed, leaving it to the chief justice or the administrative committee of the high court, as the case may be, to take an appropriate disciplinary action against the judge of the district judiciary. This discreet and confidential process is consistent with the deliberative character of the judicial system.

The apex court expunged the strictures recorded against the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Peshawar, Nusrat Yasmin (appellant) in the impugned judgment dated 26.06.2014 passed by the Peshawar High Court in Crl.A.No.633-P of 2012. "They shall not form part of the service record of the appellant or in any manner influence the competent authority against the appellant judge in her service matters," said the judgment.

Judge Nusrat had filed a petition in the Supreme Court against the judgment of Peshawar High Court. She prayed to the apex court that strictures passed by the high court against her in its judgment be expunged, as those are uncalled for, harsh and impermissible in the law.

The strictures were recorded against the appellant in the PHC judgment. A case, FIR No. 97 dated 19.08.2003, was registered against Murad Gul, Hazir Bahadur and Khan Bahadur under sections 302 /324 read with section 34 PPC in Police Station, Nizampuir, district Nowshera, for the murder of one Ghulam Haider.

Initially, accused Murad Ali was arrested, who alone was tried and convicted by the trial court. On appeal his conviction was set aside and he was acquitted by the high court. Later, the remaining two accused were also arrested and were tried separately. The trial court, presided over by the appellant, convicted them and on appeal, through the judgment in question, the high court acquitted them of the charge on the ground that similar evidence was disbelieved against the co-accused (Murad Ali) who had already been acquitted.

In this case, the trial court presided over by the appellant held that the evidence was disbelieved against the co-accused due to certain infirmities qua him (Murad Ali), but regarding the two accused before her, the evidence was firm and confidence-inspiring; hence, the appellant convicted and sentenced them to imprisonment for life, despite earlier acquittal of their co-accused by the high court. Justice Mansoor Ali Shah directed the Assistant Registrar of Supreme Court at the Peshawar Branch Registry to dispatch copy of this judgment to the Registrars of all high courts, who shall circulate it among all judges of the respective high court, for their information.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2019


the author

Top
Close
Close