Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Name of the Case

Rajasthan High Court v. Akashdeep Morya

Key Takeaways

  • The respondent in the case had been denied appointment as a Civil Judge due to his acquittal in criminal cases under unanimous circumstances which was under challenge.
  • Character cannot be interpreted as only a competent authority's certification of the character.
  • The Civil Judge (Junior Division)/Magistrate is the person with whom the common man has the most contact.
  • The suspected involvement of an officer in criminal cases may weaken public trust in the system if an honourable acquittal is not obtained.

Background

  • The candidate, who filed for a position as a civil judge, willingly disclosed that he had been involved in a number of criminal cases.
  • The Rajasthan High Court noted that the offences in all of the cases in which he was engaged were serious, and the acquittals were not unanimous.
  • After his candidacy was rejected, he filed a writ petition before the High Court.
  • The High Court stated that the crimes under Sections 323 and 324 of the IPC could not have been regarded equally to other severe crimes.
  • The appointment denial was deemed to be unsustainable and unconstitutional.

Court’s Observation

  • On appeal of the Rajasthan High Court the Supreme Court observed that at every level of the hierarchy, the job of a judicial officer entails upholding the highest standards.
  • A judicial officer performs one of the most important responsibilities of the state, namely, the resolution of conflicts between the country's citizens.
  • Judges who stand on the highest moral platform go a long way toward restoring public trust in the judicial system.
  • Though the State issues the appointment order, the High Court's involvement in the appointment of judicial officers stems primarily from its position in the constitutional framework.
  • The High Court is obligated to suggest the best qualified candidates for the position.
  • Despite the fact that it is the lowest rung in the pyramidical structure of the court, and the lowest level has the biggest volume of cases, the position of Civil Judge or Magistrate is of the highest importance.
  • The general public's opinion of a judicial officer's credentials and background is critical.

Court’s Order

  • The general public's opinion of a judicial officer's credentials and background is critical.
  • The Court affirmed a candidate's denial of appointment to a judicial officer position based on the lack of honourable acquittal in criminal cases.
  • The most qualified individuals should be appointed to the position of judicial officer, as they are responsible for performing the most critical responsibilities of the state.
  • The appeal was allowed, taking into account the candidate's age, the nature of the offences in which he was implicated, the two FIRs, and the acquittal based largely on a compromise, as well as the fact that the witnesses turned hostile and the nature of the job.

Do you think persons with criminal background should be allowed to hold a position in the judiciary? Do you think that any person with a criminal background should be allowed to be a part of the organs of the government? Tell us in the comments section below!

"Loved reading this piece by SUSHREE SAHU?
Join LAWyersClubIndia's network for daily News Updates, Judgment Summaries, Articles, Forum Threads, Online Law Courses, and MUCH MORE!!"




Tags :

  Views  154  Report



Comments
img
Post a Suggestion for LCI Team
Post a Legal Query