Judges ought not to take up any case unless assigned by CJI: SC

Judges have to follow discipline and ought not to take up any case unless it is specifically assigned by the chief justice, the Supreme Court has said while dealing with an appeal challenging an order passed by the Rajasthan High Court.

Observing that taking up a case not specifically assigned by the chief justice was an “act of gross impropriety”, the apex court wondered how a civil writ petition for clubbing First Information Reports (FIRs) could be entertained.

A bench of justices Abhay S Oka and Pankaj Mithal was hearing an appeal against the May order of the high court which had directed that no coercive steps shall be taken against three persons in connection with eight FIRs.

The bench noted the three persons had first approached the high court seeking quashing of the FIRs but no interim relief was granted to them.

It noted thereafter, they filed a separate writ petition on the civil side for clubbing the eight FIRs and consolidating them into one.

Appellant Ambalal Parihar, at whose instance six FIRs were registered against the three persons, claimed before the apex court that the method of filing a civil writ petition was invented and it was done to avoid the roster judge who had not granted interim relief.

It noted in the roster notified by the chief justice, there was a separate roster for criminal writ petitions.

It said a judge can take up a case provided either the cases of that category have been assigned to him as per the notified roster or the particular case was specifically assigned by the chief justice.

The bench said it was sure that this conduct of the three litigants will be considered by the concerned court taking up petitions under section 482 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure (CrPC) seeking quashing of the

FIRs.

“This is a fit case where the second to fourth respondents must be saddled with costs. We quantify the costs amount at Rs 50,000,” it said, adding, they would pay the cost to the Rajasthan State Legal Services Authority within a month.

While allowing the appeal, the bench held that action

of filing the civil writ

petition was nothing but a “gross abuse of process of law” and it was a classic case of forum hunting.