Back
Next 
DIPANKAR DATTA, PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA
Ratilal Jhaverbhai Parmar – Appellant
Versus
State Of Gujarat – Respondent
Headnote: Read headnote
JUDGMENT :
DIPANKAR DATTA, J.
1. In recent times, on more occasions than one, this Court has suo motu initiated proceedings having noticed attitudinal and thought patterns of learned Judges of various high courts across the country which tended to lower the image of the judiciary in general and the high courts in particular. While some of the proceedings are still pending, one such proceeding has been disposed of recently emphasising the need for learned Judges to exercise restraint while expressing one’s views in open court.
2. Yet again, a fortnight back, this Court set aside a judgment of a high court on the ground that such judgment had been signed by the learned Judge after demitting office.
3. These are distressing trends indeed.
4. As if there is no end to it, the present case unfolds facts which are equally disturbing and meets with our disapproval.
5. However, before we refer to the factual matrix giving rise to this civil appeal, noticing a decision of fairly recent origin of this Court in Balaji Baliram Mupade vs State of
Judicial decisions must be timely and reasoned to maintain the integrity of the judiciary and ensure that justice is not only done but seen to be done.
(1) Disposal of bail applications – Constitutional Courts can lay down principles governing grant of bail or anticipatory bail – However, Constitutional Courts cannot interfere with discretion of our....
Adverse remarks – There is difference between criticising erroneous orders and criticising a Judicial Officer – First part is permissible – Second category of criticism should best be avoided – No co....
(1) A Judicial Officer cannot pronounce concluding portion of his judgment in open court without entire text of judgment being prepared/dictated.
(2) Requirement of a second show cause notice rela....
Retaining file of a case for a period of 5 months after demitting office is an act of gross impropriety on part of Judge – Supreme Court cannot support such acts of impropriety.
A judgment dictated in open court is valid and effective, even if not signed by the judge who delivered it.
(1) Speedy Justice – For fault of a few, glorious and glittering name of Judiciary cannot be permitted to be made ugly.
(2) If Judgment is not delivered within three months, Registrar General shal....
The judgment emphasized the mandatory nature of the 120-day limitation for filing a written statement and the lack of discretion for condonation of delay, as supported by relevant legal provisions an....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
Listen Article