VASANT NARAYAN DAMLE Vs. HONOURABLE CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MUMBAI THROUGH THE REGISTRAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition, the petitioner who was a District and Sessions Judge in the State of Maharashtra has challenged the order passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, dismissing him from service on the ground that the misconduct alleged against him was duly proved before the Disciplinary Authority and the Enquiry Officer and therefore this punishment was meted out.

(2.) FACTS giving rise to this Petition are that the petitioner while working as a District and Sessions Judge, Nagpur granted anticipatory bail to certain accused, some of them were Advocates of that Court, which according to the Department was a misconduct and therefore a charge -sheet was issued to him. The incident as alleged by the Department is that in the evening of 30th March, 1994 certain lawyers approached the Petitioner and requested him to take up for urgent orders an application for anticipatory bail, as it pertains to certain Advocates. Taking into consideration the fact that the Advocates who mentioned the matter were seniors, the petitioner assented to the request and gave them a hearing at 10.30 p.m. at his residence. The Lawyers presented an application for bail and sought anticipatory bail. The circumstances leading to that prayer were that there was a maid servant in the family of Dewani and on 28th March, 1994 she was found dead in the porch of the house of Dewani. An offence to that effect was therefore registered by Jaripatka Police Station, Nagpur and the applicant in whose house the body was found apprehending his involvement in the crime and arrest, moved an application for grant of anticipatory bail.

(3.) THE incident in which the death of Smt. Manorama Kamble had occurred on 28th March, 1994 took a curious political turn as she was belonging to scheduled caste and sensing the possibility of getting political mileage out of this, several wild allegations and complaints were made. Speculations were making rounds of the city as to the manner in which the death occurred. We are not concerned with the conclusion of the trial of Dewani but all these speculations and allegations were made against certain judicial officers and that they had attended certain parties prior to that date at the residence of Dewani and consumed alcohol and non vegetarian food etc. It was also speculated that Dewani family was not a family of high reputation and that Advocate Shyam Dewani developed contacts with the local judicial officers and he used to host parties to such Judges. The allegation was also that the petitioner was one of the Judges, who attended such party. Taking into consideration the wild allegations made, the serious charges levelled against the Judge, High Court thought it fit to commence a departmental enquiry into the allegations of involvement of the petitioner and one Additional District Judge, Shri Wagh in the entire episode. Accordingly Mr. B.B. Varale, who was then the Director of Judicial Officer's Training Institute, Nagpur was asked to make preliminary enquiry. Thereafter in March, 1996 the petitioner was suspended from service and enquiry was started against him. The copy of the charge -sheet was duly served along with the statement of imputations. Thus the petitioner was charged of misconduct in relation to the incident of March, 1994 of granting anticipatory bail for about two days after two years and the charges read as under: 1. That Shri V.N. Damle, delinquent No. 1, was posted at Nagpur as District and Sessions Judge during the period from December, 1990 to July, 1994 and during his tenure at Nagpur was attending wet partie hosted by Advocate Shyam Devani (Accused in Crime No. 97/1994 of Police Station Jaripatka) at his house and at other places, which amounts to conduct unbecoming of a Judicial Officer. 2. That Shri V.N. Damle, delinquent No. 1, the then District and Sessions Judge, Nagpur, for considerations other than judicial, passed an order of anticipatory bail in favour of Advocate Shyam Devani and 5 others at his house on 30.3.1994 at 10.45 p.m., although, it was mentioned in the bail application itself that the accused were involved in the commission of offence punishable Under Section 302, 376, 201 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 4 of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, without giving an opportunity to the Public Prosecutor/Investigating Officer, of being heard and with the knowledge that anticipatory bail cannot be granted in cases registered under the provisions of S.C. and S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. Hence Shri Damle, delinquent No. 1 thereby, indulged in corrupt practices which amounts to grave misconduct.