The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for fair play and action, the need for notice and hearing before taking any action against individuals, and the importance of considering the factual matrix of a case. The judgment also emphasizes the need for judicial restraint in making remarks censuring the action of police officers.

ASHUTOSH KUMAR, J.

1. Anthony M. Keneddy in his book “Judicial Ethics and Rule of Law” describes the qualities of a judgment in the following manner:-

“The power of a Court, the prestige of a Court, the primacy of a Court stand or fall by one measure and one measure alone; the respect accorded to its judgment. How does the Court earn respect for its judgment from year to year and from generation to generation? The question refers us to the full scope of law, the study of lifetime. Respect for a judgment depends upon its coherence, its logic, its intellectual force, its fairness, its common sense, its root in ancient principles of law and justice and its continued vitality in a world of change. These conventional standards for assessing the wisdom of a Court decree are quite irrelevant, however, if the Court which issues the judgment is not recognized as an institution governed by a strict ethical code. A Court’s judgment will be given no serious consideration, no examination at all, if the public is not confident that its judges remain committed to neutral principles and rules for the conduct of their office.”

2. While dealing with the task of administering justice, a Judge, no doubt has to be acting judicially and giving expression to his views but he ought to be circumspect while commenting on the conduct of some. The line of discretion is not to be overstepped. The calm and sangfroid of a Judge should be reflected in every judgment, every order; rather every part of any judgment or order. The immunity which is enjoyed by a judicial officer carries with it the duty of circumspection. A Judge ought to know that any statement against any authority of the Government or any organ of the Government or any person incharge of investigation or discharging executive functions can lacerate, slash and mutilate his reputation into tatters and cause irreparable harm. It may prejudicially affect the career of such persons. What is required to be taken care of is that nobody ought to be condemned without being heard. The prejudicial effect on somebody against whom a stricture is passed cannot be assessed only in terms of the immediate damage to him. It has the potential of eroding the confidence of public on such person or institution. A judge must be wary of such cascading effect of any statement/stricture made by him while delivering judgment.

“A Judge is not free, like a loose cannon to inflict indiscriminate damage whenever he announces that he is acting in his judicial capacity”

“Stump vs. Sparkman”, 435 US 349, 1978 (Per Steward Judge)”

3. The petitioners Rakesh Chand (petitioner in W.P(Crl.) No.207/2015) and Rajinder Singh (petitioner in W.P(Crl.) No.209/2015) were the then SHO of Police Station Bhalswa Dairy and investigating officer of FIR No.165/2010 respectively. Both the petitioners are presently working with Delhi Police. Both of them are aggrieved by the observation/direction of the Trial Court in judgment and order dated 15.05.2014/29.05.2014 passed in Sessions Case No.105/2013 in connection with FIR No.165/2010 (P.S. Bhalswa Dairy).

4. The State is also aggrieved by the aforesaid observation and direction of the Trial Court and seeks deletion of the observations and directions given in para 152 of the Trial Court judgment.

5. Para 152 of the judgment reads as hereunder:-

“Before ending, in view of my observations made with regard to the statutory non compliance of the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Section 46(4) Cr.P.C) while arresting the lady accused Renu at 12.40 AM (midnight) confirming her detention/confinement to be illegal, an offence under the Indian Penal Code, I direct that appropriate action both legal and departmental in accordance with law be initiated against the erring officers i.e. SI Rajender Singh and the then SHO Police Station Bhalswa Dairy Inspector Rakesh Chand for the same. Copy of this judgment be placed before the Ld. CMM concerned. Commissioner of police, Delhi and GNCT of De