Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 3
CASE NO.:
Appeal (crl.) 1338 of 2007
PETITIONER:
State of Gujarat
RESPONDENT:
Turabali Gulamhussain Hirani & Anr
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 04/10/2007
BENCH:
A.K. Mathur & Markandey Katju
JUDGMENT:
J U D G M E N T
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1338 OF 2007
(Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Crl) No. 2252 of 2007
MARKANDEY KATJU, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. This appeal has been filed against the impugned interim order dated
11.4.2007 of the Gujarat High Court in Criminal Miscellaneous Application
No. 13747/2005 in Criminal Appeal No. 728/2005.
3. A perusal of the impugned interim order shows that a Criminal
Appeal was filed with a delay of 25 days. The learned Judge of the Gujarat
High Court (Hon’ble R.S. Garg, J.) on the application for condonation of
delay in filing the appeal passed the impugned order directing the Chief
Secretary and Law Secretary of the Gujarat government to be personally
present before him on 20.4.2007 "so that the Court may have a direct
dialogue with them that what effective steps they are taking to provide
sufficient staff to the office of the Government Pleader/Public Prosecutor
and to avoid delay at every stage". It may be mentioned that the reason
given for the delay of 25 days was the shortage of staff including
stenographers in the office of the Public Prosecutor.
4. In our opinion, the learned Judge of Gujarat High Court was totally
unjustified in summoning the Chief Secretary and Law Secretary merely
because there was a delay of 25 days in filing the appeal. It may be
mentioned that the same Hon’ble Judge (Hon. R.S Garg, J.) in several other
cases also summoned the Chief Secretary to appear before him personally.
Thus, in Special Civil Application Nos. 13969/1993 and 6896/1993 titled
Gujarat Hotels Ltd. & others vs. State of Gujarat & others dated 18.1.2007
he summoned the Chief Secretary to appear before him personally. That
case related to an incentive scheme of the State government for attracting
new entrepreneurs.
5. In another case, Special Civil Application No. 8209/1998 titled
Gujarat Revenue Tribunal vs. A.K. Chakraborty, IAS, the Bench of Hon’ble
R.S. Garg and Hon’ble M.R. Shah, JJ. by an order dated 28.2.2007 ordered
the Chief Secretary to be personally present on 6.3.2007 "so that the Court
may discuss the niceties with him and may ask him certain questions
hovering in the mind of the Court".
6. A large number of cases have come up before this Court where we
find that learned Judges of various High Courts have been summoning the
Chief Secretary, Secretaries to the government (Central and State), Director
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 3
Generals of Police, Director, CBI or BSF or other senior officials of the
government.
7. There is no doubt that the High Court has power to summon these
officials, but in our opinion that should be done in very rare and exceptional
cases when there are compelling circumstances to do so. Such summoning
orders should not be passed lightly or as a routine or at the drop of a hat.
8. Judges should have modesty and humility. They should realize that
summoning a senior official, except in some very rare and exceptional
situation, and that too for compelling reasons, is counter productive and may
also involve heavy expenses and valuable time of the official concerned.
9. The judiciary must have respect for the executive and the legislature.
Judges should realize that officials like the Chief Secretary, Secretary to the
government, Commissioners, District Magistrates, senior police officials
etc. are extremely busy persons who are often working from morning till
night. No doubt, the ministers lay down the policy, but the actual
implementation of the policy and day to day running of the government has
to be done by the bureaucrats, and hence the bureaucrats are often working
round the clock. If they are summoned by the Court they will, of course,
appear before the Court, but then a lot of public money and time may be
unnecessarily wasted. Sometimes High Court Judges summon high officials
in far off places like Director, CBI or Home Secretary to the Government of
India not realizing that it entails heavy expenditure like arranging of a BSF
aircraft, coupled with public money and valuable time which would have
been otherwise spent on public welfare.
10. Hence, frequent, casual and lackadaisical summoning of high officials
by the Court cannot be appreciated. We are constrained to make these
observations because we are coming across a large number of cases where
such orders summoning of high officials are being passed by the High
Courts and often it is nothing but for the ego satisfaction of the learned
Judge.
11. We do not mean to say that in no circumstances and on no occasion
should an official be summoned by the Court. In some extreme and
compelling situation that may be done, but on such occasions also the senior
official must be given proper respect by the Court and he should not be
humiliated. Such senior officials need not be made to stand all the time
when the hearing is going on, and they can be offered a chair by the Court to
sit. They need to stand only when answering or making a statement in the
Court. The senior officials too have their self-respect, and if the Court gives
them respect they in turn will respect the Court. Respect begets respect.
12. It sometimes happens that a senior official may not even know about
the order of the High Court. For example, if the High Court stays the order
of the Collector of suspension of a class-III or class IV employee in a
government department, and certified copy of that order is left with the
Clerk in the office of the Collector, it often happens that the Collector is not
even aware of the order as he has gone on tour and he may come to know
about it only after a few days. In the meantime a contempt of court notice is
issued against him by the Court summoning him to be personally present in
Court. In our opinion, this should not be readily done, because there is no
reason why the Collector would not obey the order of the High Court. In
such circumstances, the Court should only request the government counsel
to inform the concerned Collector about the earlier order of the Court which
may not have been brought to the notice of the Collector concerned, and the
High Court can again list the case after a week or two. Almost invariably it
will be found that as soon as the Collector comes to know about the stay
order of the High Court, he orders compliance of it.
13. In the present case, we find no occasion or reason for the learned
Judge to summon the Chief Secretary or the Law Secretary by the impugned
order. If the learned Judge was concerned about the lack of enough
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 3
Stenographers in the office of the Public Prosecutor he could have called the
Advocate General or Govt. Advocate to his chamber and have asked him to
convey the Court’s displeasure to the government, but where was the need to
summon the Chief Secretary or Law Secretary ? Hence, we set aside the
impugned interim order dated 11.4.2007 and condone the delay of 25 days in
filing the appeal before the High Court. The High Court may now proceed
to hear the Criminal Appeal in accordance with law. The appeal is allowed.
14. The Secretary General of this Court is directed to circulate a copy of
this judgment to the Registrar Generals/Registrars of all the High Courts,
who shall circulate copies of the said judgment to all Hon’ble Judges of the
High Courts.