SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(All) 695

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
HON'BLE SAUMITRA DAYAL SINGH, HON'BLE DONADI RAMESH, JJ.
Umesh Kumar Sirohi – Appellant
Versus
State Of Uttar Pradesh And Another – Respondents
Writ A No.10665 of 2021
Decided on : 02-05-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Siddharth Khare, Sr. Advocate
For the Respondent:-Ashish Mishra,C.S.C.

Judicial officers are held to a strict standard of integrity, and misconduct, including attempts to influence judicial proceedings, justifies removal from service after a fair inquiry process.

Headnote:(A) Uttar Pradesh Government Servant (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1999 - Rule 9(2) and Rule 9(4) - Constitution of India - Article 311 - Removal of Judicial Officer - The petitioner was removed from service following two departmental inquiries substantiating charges of misconduct, including bribery, attempting to influence a junior judicial officer, and making false allegations against another judge. The inquiry process complied with principles of natural justice, and the petitioner was provided ample opportunity to present his defense. The Full Court accepted the inquiries' findings and endorsed removal, which was subsequently ratified by the State Government. (Paras 6, 26, 67, 110)

(B) Judicial conduct - Standards and expectations - Judicial officers must maintain the highest standards of integrity, with misconduct severely penalized to protect public confidence in the judiciary. (Paragraphs 98, 110)

(C) Right to representation and reasons - Following the amendment to Article 311, the requirement for the disciplinary authority to provide a reasoned order remains, albeit within the confines of legislation adjusting the procedural norms of disciplinary inquiries. (Paras 31, 108)

Findings of Court:
The disciplinary procedures were fair, followed due process, and the misconduct alleged was proven based on credible evidence. The decision to remove the petitioner was based on legal grounds and the nature of the misconduct.

Issues: The key issues pertained to the ability of a judicial officer to influence proceedings involving personal interests and whether due process was followed during the disciplinary inquiries.

Ratio Decidendi: The court affirmed that maintaining judicial integrity is paramount, hence the serious misconduct warranted dismissal. The disciplinary authority is allowed discretion, but due process must be adhered to, with requisite reasons documented in cases of departure from inquiry findings.

Result: Writ petition dismissed; removal from service upheld.

Table of Content
1. the inquiry against a judicial officer must adhere to principles of natural justice. (Para 1)
2. background of disciplinary actions taken against umesh kumar sirohi. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6)
3. arguments on the violations of article 311 and rules concerning disciplinary procedures. (Para 7 , 8 , 9)
4. arguments against the findings and reasoning in inquiries. (Para 10 , 11 , 12)
5. response detailing the inquiry procedure. (Para 13)
6. analysis of evidence during inquiries and implications of judicial conduct. (Para 14 , 15)
7. discussion of necessity for reasons in judgments. (Para 16 , 17)
8. discussing the principles of natural justice in disciplinary proceedings. (Para 24 , 26)
9. conclusion on the requirement of reasons for penalties imposed. (Para 35 , 38)
10. review of regulatory compliance in disciplinary proceedings. (Para 46 , 54)
11. cases supporting strict adherence to procedural mandates. (Para 59 , 60)
12. final assessment of umesh kumar sirohi's conduct and justification of the penalties. (Para 65 , 72 , 78 , 82 , 110)
13. failure to follow disciplinary rules can lead to severe consequences for judicial officers. (Para 66)
14. final judgment on the writ petition dismissed. (Para 111)

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Aditendra Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner; Sri Ashish Mishra, learned counsel for the High Court and Sri Nimai Das, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.

2. The present writ petition has been filed to assail the penalty order passed by the State Government dated 16.04.2021, communicated to the petitioner by the Registrar(J)(Confidential), High Court Allahabad vide letter dated 28.05.2021. Thereby, the petitioner -then serving as Additional District & Sessions Judge, Lalitpur has been removed from service, with immediate effect. The petitioner was appointed to the Uttar Pradesh Civil Service (Judicial) in the year 2001. In 2013, he was promoted and thus appointed to the Uttar Pradesh Higher Judicial Service. While serving as Additional District & Sessions Judge, Meerut, first Charge Sheet dated 08.08.2016 was issued to the petitioner. Again, on 20.03.2017 a second Charge Sheet was issued to the petitioner.

3. The first Charge Sheet dated 08.08.2016 led to institution of Departmental Inquiry No. 21 of 2015, on the following four charges :

    "1. That you with the help of your younger brother Sri Raj Kumar Sirohi, the then Civil Judge (Junior Division)/Judicial Magistrate, Meerut and other family members demanded dowry as a condition for your brother's marriage with Dr. Muskan Sirohi D/o Ummed Singh (W/o Sri Raj Kumar Sirohi). Part of the demand for dowry was also fulfilled. You and your brother continued to press the demand of dowry even after marriage so much so that Sri Raj Kumar Sirohi deserted his wife for non-fulfillment of dowry demand. The demand and receipt of dowry for marriage of your brother with Dr. Muskan Sirohi is a misconduct within the meaning of Rule 11A of the Uttar Pradesh Government Servant Rules, 1956.

    Thus, you have committed misconduct within the meaning of Rule 11-A read with Rule 3 of the Uttar Pradesh Government Servants Conduct Rules, 1956.

    2.That on 26.06.2014, during the course of reconciliation meeting between the family members of Dr. Muskan Sirohi with you and your younger brother Sri Raj Kumar Sirohi, you self inflicted an injury on your left hand, as a conspiracy to involve Dr. Muskan Sirohi and her family members in a criminal case. In furtherance thereof your wife Smt. Meghana Sirohi lodged an FIR against Dr. Muskan Sirohi and her family members being Case Crime No. 472 of 2014, U/s 395, 397 IPC at P.S. Medical College, Meerut.

    Thus, you have acted in a manner which is unbecoming of a Judicial Officer. Further, you have misused your authority as a Judicial Officer and failed to maintain absolute integrity. Thus, you have committed misconduct within the meaning of Rule 3 of the Uttar Prad

                          Click Here to Read the rest of this document
                          1
                          2
                          3
                          4
                          5
                          6
                          7
                          8
                          9
                          10
                          11
                          SupremeToday Portrait Ad
                          supreme today icon
                          logo-black

                          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

                          qr

                          Scan Me!

                          India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

                          For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

                          whatsapp-icon Back to top