Court In Murder Case for Review His On Judgment Affirms Dismissal Of Sessions Judge: SC

Monday, the Supreme Court dismissed a writ petition filed by a Madhya Pradesh Additional Sessions Judge challenging her dismissal for issuing an incorrect judicial order while on probation.

The Court ruled that there was "nothing wrong" with the State of Madhya Pradesh's decision to terminate the judge's services on the recommendation of the Madhya Pradesh High Court's Full Court.

Therefore, a bench consisting of Justices UU Lalit, Ravidra Bhat, and Sudhanshu Dhulia dismissed the writ petition filed by the former judge, who appeared in person.

She was terminated while on probation due to the fact that in a murder case she tried, she initially imposed a five-year sentence for the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. Later, she changed the conviction to one under part 1 of Section 304 of the Indian Penal Code, which deals with "culpable homicide short of murder." The Full Court recommended her dismissal based on this irregularity, which the State Government accepted.

While dismissing the petition, the bench of Justices UU Lalit, Ravindra Bhat, and Sudhanshu Dhulia stated, "We wish you the best of luck in your future endeavours."

When the case was called for hearing, Justice UU Lalit stated that the Additional Sessions Judge's modification of the sentence was "quite shocking."

Since your probationary period had expired, the Administrative Committee had decided to dismiss you, Justice Lalit stated.

In response to the judge's remarks, the petitioner asserted that she was not given notice and argued that a single error could not justify termination.

"This was my first posting and initial evaluation. I'm still learning. Only one error led to my dismissal. I'm not even being given a chance to prove myself. I have been denied any opportunity to improve "The petitioner argued further.

"That depends on the nature and severity of errors. One can determine whether the errors are typographical or unintentional. But this type of utter incongruity....you are a sessions judge with the authority to impose the death penalty ", Justice Lalit said.

The petitioner argued that there are Supreme Court decisions stating that a judge cannot be disciplined for issuing an incorrect judicial order.

"If we strictly adhere to the letter of the law, if probation is not completed and the order is not stigmatising, we have no recourse," said Justice Lalit.

"We cannot intervene if the administrative committee of the High Court determines that probation has not been successfully completed. A erroneous order shall not serve as the pivot for departmental proceedings. You are literally there. But this reasoning...consider the position you currently hold "Justice Lalit continued:

According to the Code of Criminal Procedure, the judge has no authority to review a judgement, the bench stated. The petitioner then stated that she issued the modification order in response to a request from the Prosecutor. However, the court reiterated that such an action was not permitted by law.

"You are completely confused, Madam. Actually, she was set on fire. Where then is the question from 304 part 1? You are attempting to alter the verdict "Justice Lalit remarked following the reading of the decision.

 the court dismissed the petition.

Leena Dixit Versus Registrar General, MP High Court