Back
Supreme Court Orders Against Allahabad Trial Judge for
The has taken a stern view of a trial court's persistent failure to comply with its directions, ordering a against the concerned judicial officer. The bench of Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra and Justice Shree Chandrashekhar passed the order on , in the case of .
Background: A Trial Stalled Since 2020
The case originates from a Supreme Court order dated , which directed the trial court to conclude the proceedings within one year. However, even six years later, the trial remained unconcluded. The Supreme Court first noted the delay on , and sought a report from the trial court. The report was not submitted by the deadline, prompting the Court to grant two more weeks.
When the trial court still failed to respond, the Court directed the Registrar General of the to intervene. A report was eventually received, and on , the Supreme Court ordered that the trial be completed within six months, with a due by .
Repeated Defaults
On August 24, the Court noted that even this deadline had been missed.
"Today also, report from the trial court is not received. This is the third occasion where the concerned trial court has failed to submit report as sought by this Court,"
the bench observed.
The Court recorded that despite multiple opportunities, the trial court had shown "" with its orders. The Registrar General had already been involved once to ensure compliance, but the failure persisted.
Court's Action
Taking a serious view of the matter, the Supreme Court directed the Registrar General of the
to
"initiate a
against the concerned judicial officer and send a report to this Court within 15 days."
The bench made it clear that based on the outcome of the
, it would consider whether to initiate a
against the judicial officer.
What Happens Next?
The matter has been listed for , when the Supreme Court will review the report and decide on further action. The case highlights the judiciary's commitment to ensuring compliance with its orders and accountability within the judicial system.
This order underscores that even judicial officers are not immune from consequences when they repeatedly fail to adhere to court directives, especially in matters where trial delays affect the rights of litigants.
