Mumbai:
Judges must act with dignity and not indulge in behavior or behavior that would tarnish the image of the judiciary, the Bombay High Court said on Tuesday, while refusing to reappoint a civil judge accused of coming to court in an inebriated state.
Aniruddha Pathak, 52, had filed a petition in the Supreme Court against his dismissal from the post of civil junior division judge for alleged inappropriate behavior and for coming to court in an inebriated state several times.
Mr Pathak has challenged an order passed by the Law and Judiciary Department of the Maharashtra government in January 2022, removing him from the judicial service.
The order was passed after a report was filed by the Chief District and Sessions Judge of Nandurbar.
A division bench of Justices AS Chandurkar and JS Jain dismissed the petition and observed that it did not find the removal order perverse or passed without any alacrity.
“It is a universally accepted norm that judges and judicial officers must act with dignity and not indulge in conduct or behavior which is likely to tarnish the image of the judiciary or which is unbecoming of a judicial officer,” the court said.
If members of the judiciary engage in conduct that is reprehensible or unbecoming of a judicial officer, courts cannot award any damages, the report said.
“Judges, while discharging their duties, exercise the sovereign judiciary of the state and, therefore, it is expected to maintain standards, which are of the highest nature,” the court said in its order.
Mr Pathak was appointed as a junior civil judge in March 2010 and was posted to various districts until his resignation.
The charges against Mr Pathak related to inappropriate conduct on stage while presiding in court, failure to adhere to court timings and arriving at court under the influence of liquor.
He was then a judge at the Shahada court in Nandurbar district.
“We find no reason to interfere with the impugned order, especially since the petitioner was holding a position which is viewed with great respect, and if the disciplinary committee has come to the conclusion that the service has been dismissed, it cannot be said to be perverse “, the court said.
(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by DailyExpertNews staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)