The Supreme Court set aside dismissal of a Madhya Pradesh judicial officer accused of granting bail inconsistently in Excise Act cases and corruption, with Justices JB Pardiwala and KV Viswanathan noting his 27-year unblemished service and absence of due process.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court set aside the dismissal of a Madhya Pradesh judicial officer who had been accused of applying inconsistent standards while granting bail in Excise Act cases and engaging in corrupt conduct.
A bench comprising Justices JB Pardiwala and KV Viswanathan observed that the officer, who had served the judiciary for 27 years with an “unblemished” record, was removed from service without adherence to due process.
The Court expressed concern over the growing tendency of making baseless accusations against members of the lower judiciary at the instance of disgruntled litigants and highlighted the importance of safeguarding judicial officers.
Also Read: Corrupt Judge | “Post Comes With Great Responsibility”: HC Upholds Dismissal of an ADJ
The top court observed that,
“It is the reason that officers of lower judiciary are reluctant to grant bail and the high courts and Supreme Court are burdened with bail petitions,”
At the same time, the bench clarified that strict measures, including criminal proceedings, must be taken against judges involved in corruption to “weed out black sheep” from the system.
It also cautioned against bar members who make unfounded allegations against judges, warning that contempt proceedings may be initiated in such cases.
Justice Viswanathan, writing the judgment for the bench, stressed that high courts should be careful before initiating disciplinary proceedings merely because of differing judicial views.
He said,
“It should be ensured that only because an order is wrong or there is an error of judgement without anything more judicial officers are not put through the ordeal of such proceedings,”
Also Read: Supreme Court Reverses Kerala HC’s Disciplinary Action Against Judicial Officer
The petitioner, Nirbhay Singh Suliya, was serving as an Additional District & Sessions Judge when allegations of corruption and improper judicial conduct emerged. He faced a complaint regarding the biased granting of selective bail in excise cases under Sections 34(2) and 49A of the M.P. Excise Act, which highlighted inconsistencies in his decisions.
Due to these allegations, the Madhya Pradesh High Court initiated departmental proceedings, resulting in his removal from service on September 2, 2014. After his departmental appeal was denied on March 17, 2016, he filed a writ petition challenging both the removal and the rejection of his appeal.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court upheld the dismissal of Additional District Judge Nirbhay Singh Suliya, who was accused of corruption.
The court noted that his position,
“comes with a great responsibility and he was under obligation to conduct himself in a manner befitting the post held by him.”
On July 25, a bench that included Acting Chief Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva and Justice Vinay Saraf remarked that Judge Suliya
“was under duty to conduct the proceedings of bail applications in conformity with the provisions of law.” They pointed out that he granted bail to some applicants based on High Court rulings while neglecting those same rulings for others.
The High Court observed that the inquiring authority had “meticulously” reviewed various cases against Judge Suliya, concluding that,
“in some of the cases bail was granted in a liberal manner without considering relevant provisions, whereas in most of the cases, the same approach was not adopted, which amounts to application of double standard.”
The judgment conveyed a strong message that Judicial independence must go hand in hand with a dedicated sense of judicial responsibility. Any appearance of selective justice especially in sensitive criminal cases affects public trust and necessitates a decisive institutional response.
Also Read: Kozhikode Judicial Officer Apologizes for Misconduct Amid Employee Outcry
Nirbhay Singh Suliya challenged the decision of the High court before the Supreme Court.
Justice Pardiwala, agreeing with the ruling, praised Justice Viswanathan’s opinion, calling it a “very bold judgement” that will significantly help safeguard honest judicial officers.
The Supreme Court further directed that Madhya Pradesh judicial officer Nirbhay Singh Suliya be granted full financial benefits up to his retirement, while setting aside both the termination order of September 2015 and the High Court decision that had upheld it.
Case Titile: Nirbhay Singh Suliya versus The State of Madhya Pradesh and others
Read Supreme Court Order:
Read High Court Order: