Supreme Court recalls order barring Justice Prashant Kumar of Allahabad HC from taking up criminal cases

The Supreme Court removed the observations against the Allahabad High Court judge in its fresh orders. (File: PTI)

The Supreme Court on Friday recalled its August 4 order that barred Justice Prashant Kumar, an Allahabad High Court judge, from hearing criminal cases until retirement and that he be made to sit with a seasoned judge of the court.

The unprecedented directive, issued by the top court's bench of Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice R Mahadevan, came as the court took strong exception to an order passed by the Allahabad High Court judge refusing to quash a criminal complaint on the ground that a civil remedy for recovery of money was not effective.

According to Live Law, Chief Justice of India wrote to the bench after the its observations against the judge came in for criticism and requested the reconsideration of the strictures issued against Justice Prashant Kumar.

The matter, which was disposed of on August 4, was subsequently relisted for fresh directions on Friday. The development also coincides with a letter to the Chief Justice of the Allahabad High Court by 13 judges of the high court, urging him not to implement the strictures issued by the top court.

The letter, bearing the signatures of 13 judges, sought a full court meeting to resolve that the high court will not comply with the August 4 order since the Supreme Court "does not have administration superintendence over High Courts" and record its anguish over the "tone and tenor" of the order.

"We have received an undated letter from the hon'ble Chief Justice of India requesting the reconsideration of the observations in paras...In such circumstances, we directed the Registry to re-notify the main matter for considering the request made by the Chief Justice of India," the SC bench of Justice Pardiwala and Justice R Mahadevan said while explaining the reasons for relisting.

Issuing the fresh order, Justice Pardiwala said that there was no intention to cause any embarrassment to the Judge and that the only intention was to correct a manifestly perverse order.

"At the outset, we must clarify that our intention was not to cause embarrassment or cast aspersions on the concerned Judge. We would not even think of doing so. However, when the matters cross a threshold and the dignity of the institution is imperilled, it becomes the constitutional responsibility of this Court to intervene even when acting under its appellate jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution," Justice Pardiwala stated while pronouncing the order, according to Live Law.

The bench further stated that it was constrained to pass the strictures in view of the manifest error in the impugned order. When High Courts pass orders which ensure complete justice, the Supreme Court has always recorded appreciation for the High Court Judges, the bench further stated.

Setting aside the order passed by Justice Prshant Kumar on August 4, the top court had observed that the judge had made a "mockery of justice" while stating that he should be removed from criminal jurisdiction.

"The judge concerned has not only cut a sorry figure for himself but has made a mockery of justice. We are at our wits' end” to understand what is wrong with the Indian Judiciary at the level of High Court. At times we are left wondering whether such orders are passed on some extraneous considerations or it is sheer ignorance of law. Whatever it be, passing of such absurd and erroneous orders is something unpardonable," the SC bench had observed.