The Supreme Court ruled on Monday that disciplinary actions cannot be taken against a judge for making a mistake in judgment, noting that a fearless judge is the cornerstone of an independent judiciary.
It also voiced concern about baseless accusations made against judges, which causes trial court judges to be cautious when it comes to bail issues.
A bench of Justices J B Pardiwala and K V Viswanathan came to the defense of a trial judge whose services had been terminated by the Madhya Pradesh High Court due to an error of judgment in granting bail to an accused. They stated that the conduct of the judicial officer in question is more important than the verdict's correctness.
The court stated that HC must protect a judge who is the target of false and anonymous accusations, even though it must act quickly when an accusation against a judge is true "to weed out black sheep sullying the fair name of the judiciary."
"Just as an independent judiciary is the cornerstone upon which the rule of law is built, a fearless judge is the cornerstone of an independent judiciary."
The difficult burden of making decisions in cases falls to a judicial official. One side would inevitably lose the lawsuit and return disappointed.
Some of their disgruntled members may make baseless accusations in an effort to make amends. Additionally, the trial judiciary works under difficult conditions and is under a great deal of labor pressure.
Justice Viswanathan, who wrote the ruling, stated, "Most judicial officers give their very best while discharging their duties, and a large number of cases are listed in a day."
The court noted that a mistaken decision can be a legitimate error of judgment and stated that if inquiries are started on ill-conceived or motivated complaints, the trial judiciary's ability to function would be severely harmed and fearless discharge of duties would become a casualty.
"It should be made sure that a judicial officer is not subjected to the ordeal of a disciplinary action or a prosecution solely because an order is incorrect or there is an error of judgment.
Judicial personnel are unable to respond when false accusations spread quickly. The bench quashed the HC judgment and ordered the judicial officer to be restored with back pay, saying, "This is where the high court, which is vested with the supervisory control, has to exercise great caution and circumspection."
The court ruled that the accusation against the judge was baseless and that a judge's integrity cannot be called into doubt based just on an incorrect ruling.
"Holding that judgments and orders that do not specifically refer to statutory provisions are inherently dishonest judgments will be a dangerous proposition."
According to Justice Pardiwala, one of the main reasons trial court judges are hesitant to use their authority to grant bail is the beginning of departmental procedures based only on suspicion.
As a result, HCs and SC are inundated with bail requests. "Even in a worthy case, well within the bounds of the law, bail should not be denied due to a trial court judge's persistent concern of administrative action being taken.
When it comes to using their discretion in bail-related situations, trial court judges have shown a propensity to avoid their serious judicial role and responsibilities over time, he added.
