IMPORTANT POINT
Judicial Decorum – Courts higher in judicial hierarchy should refrain from commenting on conduct and calibre of Judicial Officers.

JUDGMENT :

SANDEEP MEHTA, J.

1. Heard.

2. Leave granted.

3. The appellant, being a Judicial Officer of the District Judge Cadre1 in the judicial services of the State of Rajasthan, has approached this Court¹ [Hereinafter referred to as the “appellant-Judicial Officer”] through this appeal by special leave in order to assail the strictures passed against him in order dated 3rd May, 2024² [Hereinafter referred to as the “impugned order”] passed by a learned Single Judge of the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan Bench at Jaipur³ [Hereinafter referred to as the “High Court”] while deciding the S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 4677 of 2024.

4. The chronological list of events, relevant and essential for disposal of the appeal are noted herein-below.

5. First Information Report⁴ [For short ‘FIR’] No. 224 of 2022 was registered at Police Station Gegal, District Ajmer on 23rd October, 2022 against various accused persons including Sethu @ Angrej and Sethu @ Haddi, for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 323, 341, 325, 307, 427 read with section 149 of Indian Penal Code, 1860.⁵ [For short “IPC”]

6. Sethu @ Haddi was arrested on 21st November, 2022 whereas Sethu @ Angrej was arrested on 25th November, 2022 in connection with the aforesaid FIR. The High Court granted bail to Sethu @ Haddi vide order dated 16th December, 2022.

7. It may be mentioned here that while passing the order dated 16th December, 2022, the High Court observed that the allegation of inflicting the lethal injury was against the accused Sethu @ Angrej from whom the case of the applicant therein (Sethu @ Haddi) was different.

8. At this stage, we are persuaded to note that the said FIR does not bear any reference to the offence under Section 307 IPC simpliciter being invoked in the case. As per the formal FIR, the offences under the various other sections of IPC mentioned above were applied against the accused in the said case. However, subsequent to the procurement of the medical reports, the Investigation Officer added offences punishable under Sections 325 and 307 IPC to the case. The report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. came to be filed against the accused persons nominated in FIR No. 224 of 2022 for the offences under Sections 147, 341, 323, 325, 307 and 427 read with Section 149 of IPC vide chargesheet dated 20th December, 2022.

9. The accused Sethu @ Angrej moved an application for bail which was dismissed by the Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 2, Ajmer on 17th December, 2022. Thereafter, said accused applied for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973⁶ [For short “Cr.P.C.”] and fortuitously, the same came to be listed before the appellant-Judicial Officer who was holding the charge of the Sessions Court in the capacity of a Link Officer. As many as three separate bail applications arising out of FIR No. 224 of 2022, to be specific, Bail Application Case No. 1244 of 2022 (Sachin Sen and Another vs. State of Rajasthan); Bail Application Case No. 1246 of 2022 (Tarachand alias Taru vs. State of Rajasthan) and Bail Application Case No. 1247 of 2022 (Sethu alias Angrez vs. State of Rajasthan) were listed before the appellant-Judicial Officer on 19th December, 2022.

10. It appears that while arguing the bail applications, the contention which was raised before the Court was that the case of the bail applicants was not different from that of Sethu @ Haddi, who had been enlarged on bail by the High Court vide order dated 16th December, 2022.

11. The appellant-Judicial Officer seems to be carrying some misconception that the life- threatening injuries were attributed to the said Sethu @ Haddi and thus, the case of the applicants before him was not different from the said accused (Sethu @ Haddi). Applying the principle of parity and based on the order passed by the High Court in the case of Khet Singh and Another vs. State of Rajasthan, 2021 SCC Online Raj 4096 the appellant-Judicial Officer granted bail to all the aforesaid accused pe