Agencies
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Wednesday expunged some “scandalous” and “unwarranted” observations made against the apex court by a single judge bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in a contempt case, saying it was “pained” by these remarks.
A five-judge special bench headed by Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud took suo motu note of the remarks and said these observations of Justice Rajbir Sehrawat of the high court were a “matter of grave concern”.
Observing that no court including the high courts and the Supreme Court is “supreme”, the bench, also comprising Justices Sanjiv Khanna, B R Gavai, Surya Kant and Hrishikesh Roy, said such observations were wholly unnecessary for the conduct of the proceedings before the high court and moreover, the Constitution is “supreme”.
It, however, did not issue a notice and initiate proceedings against the high court judge for his “scandalous” observations at this stage.
“We, accordingly, expunge the observations which have been made by Justice Sehrawat in the order dated July 17, 2024 and expect a greater caution should be exercised in future while dealing with orders of the Supreme Court and for that matter, the orders passed by a division bench of the high court,” the bench said.
The top court noted it has been apprised that a division bench presided over by the high court’s Chief Justice has taken suo motu notice of his observations and stayed his order. It said every judge is bound by the discipline which the hierarchical nature of judicial system proposes on judicial functioning.
“Judicial discipline in the context of the hierarchial nature of the judicial system is intended to preserve the dignity of all institutions whether district courts, the high courts or the level of the Supreme Court,” the bench said.
“We are of the view that observations which were made in the order of the single judge … Was totally unnecessary for the ultimate order which was passed,” it said, adding the gratuitous observations were absolutely unwarranted.
It said parties may be aggrieved by an order but the judges can never be aggrieved by an order of a superior court.
The bench said such observations bring entire judicial machinery into disrepute and affects not only the dignity of the apex court but high courts as well.
It said the principles governing the comity between the high courts and the Supreme Court as the apex judicial institutions have been held in numerous decisions.
