Employees Cannot Pick Favourable Terms and Reject the Rest: Bombay High Court Upholds SIDBI’s Cut-Off Date for Pension to CPF Optees Rules of the Game Were Never Changed: Delhi High Court Upholds CSIR’s Power to Prescribe Minimum Threshold in CASE-2023 Resignation Does Not Forfeit Earned Pension: Calcutta High Court Declares Company Superannuation Benefit as ‘Wages’ Under Law Fraud Vitiates Everything—Stranger Can File Independent Suit Against Compromise Decree: Bombay High Court Refuses to Reject 49-Year-Old Challenge at Threshold Mere Long Possession By One Co-Owner Does Not Destroy The Co-Ownership Right Of The Other: Madras High Court State Cannot Hide Behind An Illegal Undertaking: Punjab & Haryana High Court Questions Denial Of Retrospective Regularization Article 21-A Cannot Be Held Hostage to Transfer Preferences: Allahabad High Court Upholds Teacher Redeployment to Enforce Pupil–Teacher Ratio Arbitrator Cannot Rewrite Contract Or Travel Beyond Pleadings: Punjab & Haryana High Court Quashes ₹5.18 Crore Award Director’ in GeM Clause 29 Does Not Mean ‘Independent Director’: Gujarat High Court Sets Aside Technical Disqualification Section 25(3) Is Sacrosanct – Removal of a Trademark Cannot Rest on a Defective Notice: Delhi High Court Not Every Broken Promise Is Rape: Delhi High Court Draws Clear Line Between ‘Suspicion’ and ‘Grave Suspicion’ in False Promise to Marry Case Section 37 Is Not A Second Appeal On Merits: Delhi High Court Refuses To Re-Appreciate Evidence In Challenge To Arbitral Award Recovery After Retirement Is Clearly Impermissible: Bombay High Court Shields Retired Teacher From ₹2.80 Lakh Salary Recovery Paying Tax Does Not Legalise Illegality: Bombay High Court Refuses to Shield Alleged Unauthorized Structure Beneficial Pension Scheme Cannot Be Defeated By Cut-Off Dates: Andhra Pradesh High Court Directs EPFO To Follow Sunil Kumar B. Guidelines On Higher Pension Claims Equity Aids the Vigilant, Not Those Who Sleep Over Their Rights: Punjab & Haryana High Court Refuses to Revive 36-Year-Old Pay Parity Claim Students Cannot Be Penalised For Legislative Invalidity: Supreme Court Protects Degrees Granted Before 2005 Yash Pal Verdict Restructuring Without Fulfilment of Conditions Cannot Defeat Insolvency: Supreme Court Reaffirms Default as the Sole Trigger Under Section 7 IBC Section 100-A CPC Slams The Door On Intra-Court Appeals In RERA Matters”: Allahabad High Court Declares Special Appeal Not Maintainable Mental Distance Between ‘May Be’ and ‘Must Be’ Is Long: Patna High Court Acquits Six in Murder Case Built on Broken Chain of Circumstances Where Corruption Takes Roots, Rule of Law Is Replaced by Rule of Transaction: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Bail to DIG Harcharan Singh Bhullar Mere Voter List and Corrected SSC Certificate Cannot Prove Paternity: Andhra Pradesh High Court Rejects 21-Year-Old Bid for DNA Test in Partition Appeal Section 147 NI Act Makes Offence Compoundable At Any Stage: Karnataka High Court Sets Aside Concurrent Convictions in Cheque Bounce Case After Settlement Bald Allegations of Adultery Based on Suspicion Cannot Dissolve a Marriage: Jharkhand High Court Once a Document Is Admitted in Evidence, Its Stamp Defect Cannot Be Reopened: Madras High Court

Calcutta High Court Emphasizes Judicial Restraint and Urges Respectful Advocacy

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent judgment, the Calcutta High Court underscored the significance of judicial restraint and called for advocates to exercise professionalism and respect in court proceedings. The Hon'ble Justice Bibek Chaudhuri, delivering the judgment, stated, "Judicial restraint and discipline are as necessary to the orderly administration of justice as they are to the effectiveness of the army." The case pertains to a land dispute where an octogenarian petitioner alleged forgery and fraud by the respondents in obtaining his signature on a fabricated document. The court took into consideration the petitioner's failing health and directed the trial court to expedite the hearing of the complainant's application under Section 173(8) of the Cr.P.C within one week. Additionally, if necessary, the court ordered the recording of the complainant's statement under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C within the same timeframe.

This judgment highlights the court's commitment to upholding the principles of justice while maintaining decorum in the courtroom. It emphasizes the need for judges to be impartial and advocates to conduct themselves respectfully during proceedings. The court's directive aims to strike a balance between administrative challenges and the humanitarian considerations surrounding the petitioner's health. By urging respectful advocacy, the court seeks to ensure that litigants receive a fair hearing and that justice is not only done but seen to be done.

The judgment references legal principles from previous cases, including Vishwanathan Vs. Abdul Wahid (1963 Supreme Court 1) and A.M. Mathur V Pramod Kumar Gupta [(1990) 2 SCC 533], further reinforcing the importance of judicial conduct and restraint. This decision serves as a reminder to legal professionals of their duty to maintain the integrity of the judicial process and uphold the rights of litigants.

The Calcutta High Court's ruling not only addresses the specific case at hand but also sets a precedent for future proceedings, emphasizing the need for mutual respect between judges, advocates, and litigants. By promoting a respectful and dignified courtroom environment, the court aims to foster public confidence in the judicial system and ensure justice is delivered fairly and impartially.

Date of Decision: 12th June, 2023

 Atindra Nath Mondal vs The State of West Bengal & Ors.

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Atindra-Nath-Mondal-vs-State-12-June-Cal.-HC1.pdf"]

Latest Legal News