The Supreme Court has cautioned courts from passing disparaging remarks against subordinate judges as it will lower the image of the judiciary in the eyes of the public besides affecting their career.
"Using intemperate language and casting strictures on the judges of the lower judiciary diminishes the image of judiciary in the eyes of public," the apex court said, citing its earlier directions.
A Bench of Justices G S Singhvi and C K Prasad quashed the observations made by the Andhra Pradesh High Court against the principal district judge, Kadapa, after the judge moved the apex court for expunging the remarks.
The high court had made certain disparaging remarks in a judgment dated June 25, 2009 against the judge while setting aside an injunction order passed by him in a land dispute.
"The division bench of the high court may be fully justified in setting aside the order of injunction, but there was absolutely no justification for the division bench to make highly disparaging remarks against the appellant as a judicial officer casting doubts on his ability to decide the cases objectively.
"The use of the words 'out of sheer arrogance and disrespect to the lawful order' and the expression 'judicial authoritarianism' in paragraph 10 shows that the division bench ignored the words of caution administered by this court in several judgments," the apex court said.
The bench said the high court had no justification for castigating the judge as it would lower his image in public.
"The observations and remarks made by the division bench of the high court are bound to adversely affect the image of the appellant in the eyes of the public, his credibility as a judicial officer and also affects his career.
"We are sure that if the division bench of the high court had kept in view the judgments of this court, it would not have made disparaging remarks against the appellant, which, in the facts and circumstances of the case, were not at all called for," it said while expunging the remarks.
