Additional Sessions Judge Ravi Kumar Diwakar of Muzaffarnagar has once again questioned the administrative decision to withdraw 97 murder cases from his court, raising concerns over the manner in which the cases were transferred by the District and Sessions Judge.
The observations came in a recent judgment, in which Justice Diwakar questioned whether a judicial officer functioning under the administrative supervision of a District Judge is obliged to accept an order that, in his view, is contrary to law or issued without jurisdiction.
The judge posed a broader question concerning judicial independence and administrative authority, asking where a judge should seek redress when an act of injustice is allegedly committed against the judicial officer himself.
Justice Diwakar observed that although a District and Sessions Judge possesses statutory authority to transfer cases, the exercise of such power cannot be divorced from the legal basis and circumstances warranting the transfer.
He particularly questioned the withdrawal of a large number of serious criminal matters in a single administrative exercise. According to the judge, merely invoking the authority of the Sessions Judge to transfer cases would not, by itself, justify the wholesale movement of case files. The exercise of such administrative power, he indicated, must have a legally sustainable basis.
The 97 cases were recalled from Justice Diwakar’s court pursuant to nine transfer orders issued on August 18, shortly before the then District and Sessions Judge’s retirement. The orders, according to the judge, did not disclose reasons for transferring the matters.
Justice Diwakar further underscored the requirement that administrative decisions affecting judicial proceedings should conform to the rule of law. He stressed that India is governed by law rather than arbitrary exercise of authority and that orders passed by public authorities should disclose the reasons on which they are founded.
The controversy surrounding the transfer of cases emerged after Justice Diwakar pronounced a series of capital punishment verdicts. He has sentenced 23 persons to death in 11 cases over the past five months, according to the latest report.
The transfer of the 97 murder cases had previously been reported as an administrative recall of matters pending before the judge’s fast-track court. Earlier reports noted that the cases involved offences carrying punishment of death or life imprisonment. The matters were subsequently placed before the District and Sessions Judge.
Justice Diwakar had earlier alleged that the transfer of cases could benefit gangsters and criminal elements. Those assertions represent the judge’s stated concerns; the administrative transfer itself does not constitute an official finding of misconduct against the judicial officer or establish that the cases were moved for that purpose
The post UP trial Judge questions transfer of 97 murder cases, asks where a Judge should turn when faced with injustice appeared first on India Legal.