SC Withdraws Order Removing Allahabad HC Judge Prashant Kumar from Criminal Roster

New Delhi: In a significant reversal, the Supreme Court of India on Friday withdrew its earlier remarks against Justice Prashant Kumar of the Allahabad High Court, and deleted its directive barring him from handling criminal matters until retirement.

The bench, led by Justice J.B. Pardiwala, clarified that the Court had no intention to embarrass or undermine the High Court judge and acknowledged that only the Chief Justice of a High Court, being the "master of the roster", has the authority to assign judicial work to other judges.

The now-deleted orders prevented the judge from handling criminal cases and directed the Chief Justice of the High Court to place him on a Division Bench beside a seasoned senior judge. The Bench underlined that these orders were made in response to reoccurring concerns about judicial conduct, adding, "The impugned order is not the only erroneous order of the concerned Judge that we have investigated for the first time." We have looked into many such erroneous orders over time."

This development comes a day after 13 sitting judges of the Allahabad High Court wrote to Chief Justice Arun Bhansali, urging him to convene a Full Court meeting in response to the Supreme Court’s August 4 order, which had directed that Justice Kumar be removed from the criminal roster and be made to sit with a senior judge.

The earlier Supreme Court order had come in the context of a case involving M/s Shikhar Chemicals, where Justice Kumar had observed that criminal prosecution could be justified in a civil dispute to recover unpaid dues, given the delays in civil litigation. The top court, while overturning that view, had passed strong remarks and directed administrative changes in the judge's duties, prompting concern from within the High Court itself.

In a letter, Justice Arindam Sinha, supported by 12 other judges, criticized the tone and substance of the Supreme Court’s observations, pointing out that the order was issued without notice and touched upon administrative mattersthat fall outside the apex court’s jurisdiction.

On Friday, however, the Supreme Court appeared to be course-correct, clarifying that its original intent was limited to the legal merits of the case and not meant to infringe upon the autonomy of the High Court or its judges.

“The observations are withdrawn,” the Court said, directing that its earlier order be modified accordingly.

Justice Pardiwala noted that the Court's views in paragraphs 23, 24, 25, and 26 were not intended to cause embarrassment. He said that the now-withdrawn directives were issued in response to repeated concerns and were motivated by the remarks in paragraph 27.

"Our intention was not to cause embarrassment or aspersion. However, when matters cross a threshold… the directions in para 25, 26, and 27 were issued keeping in mind the observation in para 27," Justice Pardiwala said.