ARUN DEVENDRA OZA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) One cardinal principle in the justice delivery system of this country is sobriety, moderation and reserve, read together. This being the settled principle since the decision of this Court in Mohd. Naim case (State of U. P. v. Mohd. Naim) and the said reasoning has been followed in Niranjan Patnaik case (Niranjan Patnaik v. Sashibhushan Kar) and again this Court reiterated the same in Joseph case (State of Gujarat v. K. V. Joseph) with the following observations:

(3.) Unfortunately, this special leave petition is directed against the strictures and remarks of personal nature made by the learned Single Judge of the Gujarat High Court in Crl. A. No. 942 of 2000. The remarks, to say the least, are rather unfortunate and aim solely at an advocate who has been practising at the Bar for the last 25 years. We do feel it expedient to refer to some of the remarks made in the impugned judgment. They read as follows: