The Supreme Court has expressed serious concern over growing threats and attacks directed at judges and their family members, particularly in view of the reported threats being faced by former Bombay High Court judge Justice GS Patel and his family, observing that such incidents have the potential to undermine judicial independence and adversely affect the administration of justice.
The Bench of Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva made these observations on Tuesday while hearing a bail plea filed by a man accused of leading an attack on the residence of a judicial officer in Madhya Pradesh.
The Court noted that intimidation, threats and acts of violence against judges for discharging their judicial functions strike at the very foundation of the justice delivery system. If judicial officers are targeted for passing orders and judgments, it could create a chilling effect on the exercise of judicial duties and discourage judges from functioning fearlessly and independently.
During the hearing, the Bench referred to recent reports concerning retired Bombay High Court judge Justice Gautam S Patel and his family. The Court took note of media reports indicating that Justice Patel and his family members have allegedly been facing threats and that his granddaughter was reportedly assaulted in London. The Bench observed that such incidents cannot be ignored and highlighted the broader implications of attacks on members of judicial families.
Justice Patel has reportedly faced threats following his April 2024 judgment in the Dawoodi Bohra leadership dispute. Recent reports suggest that members of his family, including his daughter residing in London, have allegedly been subjected to threats and acts of violence, leading to investigations by authorities in both India and the United Kingdom.
The observations came in the course of hearing the bail application of Priyanshu Singh, who has remained in custody for more than seven months in connection with allegations of vandalism and intimidation at the residence of a magistrate in Madhya Pradesh.
According to the prosecution, the incident occurred after a bail application previously filed by Singh was rejected by the concerned magistrate. It was alleged that Singh subsequently conspired with others and orchestrated an attack on the judicial officer’s residential premises. The State contended that Singh and several co-accused entered the magistrate’s bungalow during the night, damaged property, hurled stones, abused the officer and issued threats to kill him.
The prosecution further relied on CCTV footage, which allegedly showed Singh at various locations connected with the incident, including near the magistrate’s residence. The State argued that the alleged acts amounted to direct interference with the administration of justice and therefore constituted a serious offence warranting strict judicial scrutiny.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court had earlier rejected Singh’s bail application in May after taking note of the gravity of the allegations, his alleged role as the principal accused and his criminal antecedents. The High Court had recorded that seven criminal cases were pending against him.
Before the Supreme Court, counsel appearing for Singh argued that he had already undergone more than seven months of incarceration and that his arrest was based largely on suspicion. It was submitted that although the allegations were serious, there was no direct evidence conclusively establishing his involvement in the alleged attack.
The Supreme Court, however, appeared unconvinced by the submissions and noted the prosecution’s allegation that Singh had led the group involved in the attack on the magistrate’s residence. The Bench also referred to his criminal history while considering the request for bail.
Emphasising the seriousness of attacks on judicial officers and their families, the Court observed that incidents of intimidation directed at judges, whether serving or retired, have wider ramifications for the rule of law and the effective functioning of the judiciary.
After hearing the parties, the Court declined to grant bail to Singh. However, taking note of the period already spent in custody, it disposed of the petition while granting him liberty to move a fresh bail application before the trial court in accordance with law.
The post Supreme Court expresses concern over attack on former Bombay High Court judge Justice Gautam Patel and his family appeared first on India Legal.