A bench of Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal made the observation while hearing a transfer petition filed by Assadullah Bhat and others.
Kashmir Impulse Desk
Srinagar, May 1
The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh has cautioned litigants and lawyers against making scandalous and unsubstantiated allegations against judicial officers, saying such conduct would invite appropriate legal action.
A bench of Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal made the observation while hearing a transfer petition filed by Assadullah Bhat and others.
The court said the petitioners had levelled “scandalous and unsubstantiated allegations” without proof against two judicial officers, including a sub-judge and a principal district judge.
When questioned by the court, counsel for the petitioners was unable to substantiate the allegations and sought permission to withdraw the petition unconditionally. The court, however, declined the request.
“Permitting such a course would amount to allowing them to escape the consequences of making reckless, scandalous, and unsubstantiated allegations,” the court said.
The bench observed that while the High Court exercised supervisory jurisdiction over the district judiciary, it also had a duty to protect judicial officers from baseless accusations.
“Any indulgence of baseless imputations would not only strike at the very root of judicial independence but also corrode institutional integrity and erode public confidence in the administration of justice,” the court said.
The court added that judicial officers could not function independently and fearlessly if subjected to unfounded allegations aimed at maligning the judicial process.
Describing such accusations as an affront to the dignity and independence of the judiciary, the court warned litigants and members of the bar against making reckless allegations unsupported by credible material.
The bench directed the petitioners to file separate affidavits within one week tendering unconditional apologies and expressing remorse for the allegations made in the petition.
The court also cautioned the petitioners’ counsel, saying pleadings must be drafted responsibly and supported by evidence.

















Leave a Comment
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked with *