The Allahabad High Court strongly condemned CJM Bhagwan Das Gupta for misusing his authority by filing a baseless criminal case against State Electricity Department officials. Justices Chaturvedi and Idrisi found the allegations unfounded, exposing Gupta’s personal vendettas.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
UTTAR PRADESH: The Allahabad High Court recently issued a strong condemnation against Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM) Bhagwan Das Gupta of Banda, exposing his misuse of judicial authority. The CJM was found to have filed a baseless criminal case against officials of the State Electricity Department, using his position to target government servants.
Justices Rahul Chaturvedi and Azhar Husain Idrisi, who presided over the matter, meticulously examined the complaint filed by CJM Gupta. Their investigation revealed that the allegations of fraud, cheating, fabrication, and extortion against the officials were entirely unfounded and constructed to serve the CJM’s personal vendettas.
“This criminal complaint is merely a fabrication intended to impart a ‘bitter lesson’ to government servants,”
– the Court observed, emphasizing that the case was strategically designed to intimidate the officials into submission. The CJM’s actions were seen as an attempt to assert his dominance and demonstrate the extent of his power.
The Court further elaborated on the CJM’s motives, stating-
“These government servants from the Electricity Department were not serving his interests or complying with his demands. By initiating a criminal prosecution against them with bogus and wild allegations, the respondent no.4 aims to force them to submit to him.”
In its detailed judgment, the High Court expressed deep concern over the ethical breaches committed by CJM Gupta. The Court noted that by engaging in such conduct, Gupta had effectively “auctioned his chair, honour and reputation.” His threats towards the government officers, aimed at advancing his own personal and financial interests, were deemed a severe violation of judicial ethics.
The Court also took the opportunity to reiterate the high standards of behavior expected from judicial officers, pointing out that CJM Gupta’s actions were a stark deviation from these standards.
“A judicial officer … is initiating a criminal case just to harass the petitioners, who were performing their government duties. This is being done to force the petitioners to submit to him and comply with his demands,”
-the Court remarked, underscoring the severity of the CJM’s misconduct.
ALSO READ: Police Who Killed Four Granted Parole for Over Two Years: Punjab & Haryana High Court Orders Probe
The Allahabad High Court quashed the fraudulent case against the State Electricity Department officials, thereby upholding the principles of justice and integrity. Additionally, the Court issued directives to prevent such misuse of power in the future, ensuring that judicial officers cannot exploit their positions to file criminal cases for personal reasons.
The Allahabad High Court has mandated new protocols for judicial officers wishing to file First Information Reports (FIRs) in their personal capacity. This decision comes in the wake of the controversial actions of Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM) Bhagwan Das Gupta, who misused his authority to lodge a false criminal case against State Electricity Department officials.
Justices Rahul Chaturvedi and Azhar Husain Idrisi were unequivocal in their condemnation of CJM Gupta’s conduct, identifying the complaint he filed as “utter falsehood” and noting that it included “baseless and fabricated allegations of fraud, cheating, fabrication, and extortion.”
In 2009 when CJM Gupta purchased a residential property in Lucknow. In 2013, he requested the electricity department to transfer the electricity account to his name. The Sub-Divisional Officer of the local energy sub-station informed him of an outstanding bill amounting to Rs.1,66,916 on the connection. Shocked by this, CJM Gupta filed a complaint accusing the previous owner, her husband, and the electricity officials of various offences under Sections 420, 464, 467, 468, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC).
The officials defended their actions, stating they were merely following protocol in demanding payment of the outstanding dues before granting a new connection. However, CJM Gupta persisted, filing a consumer complaint which was dismissed, and an unsuccessful appeal to the Electricity Ombudsman.
In 2023, CJM Gupta lodged an FIR in his personal capacity against the electricity department officials, prompting the officials to petition the High Court for its dismissal. The High Court found the FIR to be “cooked-up allegations” driven by CJM Gupta’s failed previous attempts.
“It is unheard of for a sitting Chief Judicial Magistrate to act as an ordinary litigant to trap officials of the Electricity Department by initiating criminal proceedings against them, likely because they declined to serve his interests. By twisting their arms, Shri Bhagwan Das Gupta, C.J.M. (Respondent no.4), aims to force these petitioners to submit to him so that they ignore the outstanding bill on the previous electricity connection and provide a new electricity connection to his residential premises.”
-the Court added.
The Court also highlighted CJM Gupta’s unethical collaboration with a sub-inspector in Banda to fabricate the FIR, referencing incriminating WhatsApp chats between them. A Special Investigation Team (SIT) later confirmed that no crime had been committed by the electricity department officials.
“The report from the S.I.T., as mentioned above, has completely exposed the conduct of Dr. Bhagwan Das Gupta, C.J.M., and his level of functioning. If Dr. Bhagwan Das Gupta, C.J.M., is so keen and adamant about booking the petitioners, then he must quit his office and the chair, and thereafter contest the case like an ordinary litigant,”
-the Court stated.
The High Court quashed the FIR against the government officers and instructed that a copy of this judgment be maintained in CJM Gupta’s service record. This ruling underscores the necessity for judicial officers to obtain assent from the concerned District Judge before filing FIRs in their personal capacity, except in cases involving severe crimes such as murder, suicide, rape, dowry death, or dacoity.
- Advocate Mukesh Kumar Singh represented the petitioners (electricity department officials).
- Advocate Baleshwar Chaturvedi assisted the Court as an amicus curiae.
- Government Advocate Avinash Mani Tripathi represented the State, and Advocate Anwar Hussain appeared for CJM Gupta.
CASE TITLE:
Manoj Kumar Gupta and Others v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others.
