The Court found that he acted as a “mere puppet” in multiple criminal complaints filed by his acquaintances.
Punjab: The Punjab and Haryana High Court has upheld the dismissal of a Civil Judge (Senior Division), Pradeep Synghal, for serious misconduct. The Court found that he acted as a “mere puppet” in multiple criminal complaints filed by his acquaintances.
ALSO READ: Punjab And Haryana High Court Dismisses PIL To Make Karwa Chauth Compulsory For All Women
A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sumeet Goel ruled against Synghal, stating that he had issued summons in seven criminal cases filed by Pankaj Mittal and Vikas Mittal without following the legal procedures mandated under Section 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC).
The Bench noted, “This fact assumes significance in light of the fact that the complainants were listed as Facebook friends of the petitioner, and records indicate telephonic communications between them and the petitioner.”
The Court also considered the statement of a process server, who claimed that Synghal had pressured him into traveling to Nasik, Maharashtra, to serve the summons. The server alleged he had acted under “verbal instructions and intimidation“ from Synghal.
ALSO READ: Punjab and Haryana High Court Recommends 15 Judges Amid Staggering Backlog
After reviewing all the evidence, the Court concluded that the allegations of misconduct against Synghal were well-founded.
Background
Pradeep Synghal had cleared the Punjab Civil Services (Judicial) Examination in 2011. He was later promoted to Civil Judge (Senior Division) in 2016. However, in 2020, he was suspended after a fact-finding inquiry raised concerns about his conduct. In 2021, formal disciplinary proceedings began, and he was issued a chargesheet listing serious allegations.
The chargesheet detailed the following allegations:
- Misuse of Judicial Authority: Synghal was accused of working in collusion with Pankaj Mittal and Vikas Mittal by handling seven criminal complaints mechanically, without proper legal procedure. The complaints were allegedly manipulated so that they fell under Synghal’s jurisdiction in Jagraon. It was alleged that Synghal “abused judicial discretion, acted as a mere puppet in the hands of these complainants to facilitate their ulterior motives and effectively assumed the role of their de facto recovery agent.”
- Illegal Summons to Distant Locations: Synghal was found to have misused his position by sending process servers to Maharashtra and Bihar without valid legal reasons, thereby giving unfair advantage to the complainants.
- Irregularities in Financial Records: The financial records related to the receipt book of challans, maintained in the Nazar office of the Sub-Divisional Courts in Jagraon, were not properly maintained. The authorities suggested that embezzlement could not be ruled out. Synghal was accused of failing to report these discrepancies.
- Intimidation of Court Staff: Synghal was also alleged to have threatened a process server, summoning him with the intent to silence him.
In 2023, the Inquiry Officer found charges 1, 2, and 4 to be fully substantiated. Following this, the High Court Vigilance Committee accepted the inquiry report, leading to Synghal’s dismissal.
Synghal challenged his dismissal, arguing that he had performed his judicial duties with honesty and fairness. He claimed that his strict judicial approach had displeased local advocates and litigants, leading to false complaints. He also argued that there was no solid legal evidence against him.
However, the Court rejected his arguments, stating that the findings were backed by substantial evidence. The Court dismissed any claim that the disciplinary action was based on mere assumptions.
The Bench categorically stated, “It is abundantly clear that the disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner were conducted strictly in accordance with law, procedural due process was adhered to, and the petitioner was afforded ample opportunity to defend himself.”
Based on these findings, the Court dismissed Synghal’s plea and upheld his removal from service.
- For Pradeep Synghal: Senior Advocate Vijay Kumar Jindal, with Advocates R Kartikeya, Pankaj Gautam, and Abhishek Shukla.
- For the State of Punjab: Senior Deputy Advocate General Salil Sabhlok.
- For the High Court: Senior Advocate Gaurav Chopra, with Advocates Ranjeet Singh Kalra and Seerat.
Case Title: Pradeep Synghal v State of Punjab and others
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
