HC: District judges are afraid of prejudice and other heinous accusations
PRAYAGRAJ: According to the Allahabad High Court, the district-level judiciary judges withhold decisions out of concern that they may result in administrative complaints and consequent transfers. The court also said that it is difficult for district judges to freely exercise their authority and that they run the risk of being transferred due to ludicrous accusations of prejudice.
Justice JJ Munir noted, “The district judiciary also faces transfers on hideous and absurd allegations of bias, without the slightest fear about the consequences in the minds of those who make them,” while dismissing a writ petition filed by one Maya Devi seeking recovery of possession of property and an injunction. If a judge in a civil court is continuously conscious of both the professional risk of having his orders overturned by a higher court and the potential harm to his career should he issue orders of significant consequence that his conscience dictates he must, it becomes challenging for him to exercise his jurisdiction freely.”
The petitioner filed an application before the police and other agencies, which have no place in a civil dispute such as this one, The court regretted that the petitioner had done so rather than presenting a petition before the civil court, which is the proper venue. “Though citizens’ attitudes toward civil courts cannot be accepted, civil courts have become lethargic due to various reasons, including strikes that take away from judicial time.” The court also noted that district courts are not adhering to the scheduled court hours.
The civil court is now “a place of somewhat non-promising resort” for someone who needs and wants immediate redress, the court said, due to the combination of all these elements.
In this instance, Vir Bahadur Singh sold the petitioner a site in Kanpur Nagar via a registered sale transaction. The revenue records included her name. But the petitioner claims that the same Vir Bahadur and his cronies prevented her from taking control of the property. She filed a formal complaint under the SC/ST Act, as the SDM did not respond to her concern.
The petitioner’s spouse, a head constable in the Lucknow provincial armed constabulary, sent a letter to the Mahanagar, Lucknow, commandant of the PAC, who sent it to the Kanpur Nagar commissioner of police. The petitioner went to the high court in order to get a writ of mandamus for the surrender of possession since the authorities had not taken any action.
The petitioner had addressed every entity that did not have jurisdiction over the issue, except for the civil court, which typically has jurisdiction over such instances, as the court noted in its ruling dated April 8 when dismissing the writ petition.
