The Gujarat High Court has recently upheld the dismissal of a judicial magistrate, Nilesh Chauhan, for his unauthorized leave and inappropriate conduct, setting a precedent for judicial accountability and professionalism.
Nilesh Chauhan, who joined the lower judiciary in 2005 and was serving as a judicial magistrate first class in Vadodara in 2013, became embroiled in a dispute with the Vadodara Bar Association, particularly its president, Nitin Patel. The conflict escalated following a statement by Patel, which led Chauhan to write a letter to the principal district judge and the unit judge of the high court. In this letter, Chauhan expressed his refusal to resume office until the issue with the Bar association, whose strike he had opposed, was resolved.
Chauhan’s actions, including his use of intemperate language against the principal district judge and the High Court judge and making baseless allegations, led to a chargesheet issued by the High Court in March 2014. He was questioned about his unauthorized absence between May and July 2013. Despite denying the charges, an inquiry found him guilty of absenteeism and using undignified language against his seniors, resulting in his suspension and eventual dismissal in December 2015.
Chauhan challenged his dismissal, arguing that his letter was an expression of anguish and that the punishment was disproportionate. However, the High Court’s administrative side maintained that a judicial officer abandoning duties is highly unbecoming and akin to going on strike.
Also read-Retired Bombay HC Chief Justice Ramesh Dhanuka Loses ₹50K in Cyber Fraud Case – LawChakra
A bench comprising Justice Biren Vaishnav and Justice Nisha Thakore deliberated on the case. They noted that while an ordinary employee’s unauthorized absence might be perceived differently, similar standards cannot be applied to a judicial officer who abandons his service in defiance. The bench stated,
“The committee’s report on the administrative side of this court has, therefore, rightly recorded that such conduct on the part of the delinquent officer is not befitting a judicial officer.”
In his letter, Chauhan had remarked that the entire judicial system was facing a “rot” due to elements like the protesting lawyers. He accused the principal district judge and the High Court’s administrative judge of indirectly encouraging the systematic destruction of the judicial system.
The Gujarat High Court’s decision to uphold Chauhan’s dismissal underscores the importance of maintaining decorum, discipline, and respect for hierarchy in the judicial system. This ruling serves as a reminder of the high standards of conduct expected from judicial officers and the serious implications of deviating from these standards.
