Consensual Relationship That Later Turns Sour Is Not Rape: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Breach of Promise Case Double Presumption of Innocence Applies; No Interference Unless Trial Court Judgment Is Perverse: Allahabad High Court in Murder Appeal Under BNSS A Single Act of Corruption Warrants Dismissal – 32 Years of Service Offers No Immunity: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds ASI’s Removal Suit Against Trustee Without Charity Commissioner’s Consent Is Statutorily Barred: Bombay High Court Government Can't Deny Implied Surrender After Refusing to Accept Possession: Madras HC Clarifies Scope of Section 111(f) of TP Act Custodial Interrogation Must Prevail Over Pre-Arrest Comfort in Hate Speech Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail for Provocative Remarks Against Migrants Mutation Order Without Notice Cannot Stand in Law: Orissa High Court Quashes Tahasildar's Rejection for Violating Natural Justice Cruelty Must Be Grave and Proven – Mere Allegations of Disobedience or Demand for Separate Residence Don’t Justify Divorce: Jharkhand High Court Rejects Husband’s Divorce Appeal Retaliatory Prosecution Cannot Override Liberty: Himachal Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in PMLA Case Post CBI Trap of ED Officer Illegal Remand Without Production of Accused Is Not a Technical Lapse, But a Constitutional Breach: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Major NDPS Case Inherent Power Under Section 528 BNSS Not a Substitute for Article 226 When FIR Is Under Challenge Without Chargesheet or Cognizance Order: Allahabad High Court Possession Without Title Is Legally Insubstantial: Gujarat HC Dismisses Appeal By Dairy Cooperative Over Void Land Transfer You Can Prosecute a Former Director, But You Can’t Force Him to Represent the Company: Calcutta High Court Lays Down Clear Limits on Corporate Representation in PMLA Cases Conviction Cannot Rest on Tainted Testimony of Injured Witnesses in Isolation: Bombay High Court Acquits Five in Murder Case One Attesting Witness is Sufficient if He Proves Execution and Attestation of Will as Required by Law: AP High Court Land Acquisition | Delay Cannot Defeat Just Compensation: P&H High Court Grants Enhanced Compensation Despite 12-Year Delay in Review Petitions by Landowners Allegations Implausible, Motivated by Malice: Kerala High Court Quashes Rape Case After Finding Abuse Claims a Counterblast to Civil Dispute Adoptions Under Hindu Law Need No Approval from District Magistrate: Madras High Court Declares Administrative Rejection of Adoptive Birth Certificate as Illegal Findings of Fact Cannot Be Re-Appreciated in an Appeal Under Section 10F Companies Act: Madras High Court Equality Is Not A Mechanical Formula, But A Human Commitment: P&H High Court Grants Visually Impaired Mali Retrospective Promotions With Full Benefits Orissa High Court Rules Notice for No Confidence Motion Must Include Both Requisition and Resolution – Provision Held Mandatory Ashramam Built on Private Land, Managed by Family – Not a Public Religious Institution: Andhra Pradesh High Court Quashes Endowments Notification Cruelty Must Be Proved, Not Presumed: Gujarat High Court Acquits Deceased Husband In 498A Case After 22 Years Trade Dress Protection Goes Beyond Labels: Calcutta High Court Affirms Injunction Over Coconut Oil Packaging Mimicry Mere Filing of Income Tax Returns Does Not Exonerate the Accused: Madras High Court Refuses Discharge to Wife of Public Servant in ₹2 Crore DA Case

After the Supreme Court intervened, the Patna High Court reverses its decision to suspend a POCSO judge.

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In response to the Supreme Court's intervention, the Patna High Court decided to drop its action against a district judge from Bihar who had been suspended with effect from February of this year. Shishikant Rai v. High Court of Judicature at Patna & Anr.

Shashi Kant Rai, an additional sessions judge from Araria in Bihar, challenged a suspension order that had just been upheld by the High Court in a Supreme Court case.

According to the order made public today and signed by the Registrar General of the High Court, the High Court decided to end departmental proceedings against the Special Judge under POCSO (Protection of Children from Sexual Offenses Act) as a result of the Supreme Court's ruling earlier this week.

The panel of Justices UU Lalit and S Ravindra Bhat stated on Monday that it would be best for everyone if the disciplinary actions against the judge from Araria, Bihar, were dropped, especially since it may send the wrong message to other judges.

"We sincerely urge that you drop everything. If you don't want to, we can start right away. Unless you're alleging corruption, there must be something evident. He is terribly unfair to him because all he is doing is following directions. It gives other, more competent people the wrong impression. The Bench had spoken a statement.

There shouldn't be an overzealous desire to punish, according to Justice Bhat.

The judge was ready to provide a statement before the High Court challenging the claims made against him, according to Senior Attorney Vikas Singh, who was representing the petitioner.

The district judge claimed before the Supreme Court that he was the only one singled out for criticism of the recently put in place evaluation mechanism for promotions in the district justice.

After being passed over repeatedly for promotion as a civil judge, the petitioner-judge had written to the High Court asking it to consider restoring seniority as a foundation for such raises (senior division).

It is claimed that by issuing the petitioner a show cause notice right away and then suspending him without giving a reason, the Hon'ble High Court violated its constitutional obligations to protect and guide judicial personnel.

It's interesting to note that the petitioner had judged a man guilty of sexually assaulting a child in November 2021 after only one day of hearings and had given him a life sentence.

In his case before the highest court, Rai alleged that after issuing the order, he received death threats.

He was also mentioned in relation to the suspension order and the current disciplinary processes, both of which allegedly occurred without any justification and caused him mental agony because "he stands condemned for an action that otherwise gained the adoration of the State."

One of the reasons he was suspended was because he handed down a death sentence after deliberating on a case for four days. During a previous hearing, the top court had stated the following regarding this topic:

"We've been trying to figure out how to evaluate mitigating circumstances in death sentences, and they must view the jail records. The judge pronounced the death sentence in this instance in just four days.

Latest Legal News