SUCHITRA DUBEY Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This reference has been made vide order dated 14-12-2000 passed in W.P. No. 5915/2000. The contemnor has filed the writ petition assailing order dated 9-5-1997 by which she has been reverted from the post of Additional District Judge to that of Civil Judge Class I after Departmental Enquiry. Certain allegations of bias were made against the then Chief Justice of this Court in the writ application in Paragraphs 5.7,5.14,5.16,5.17 and 6.1. It was also averred in the petition that punishment imposed by Full Court was vitiated due to hostility of the then Chief Justice.

(2.) Single Judge opined that the averments made that the then Chief Justice of this Court was in a position to influence the decision of the Full Court on the administrative side, was also improper. The averments were made to malign the image of the then Chief Justice of this Court and also of this Court. The petition was filed by a senior member of Bar under his signatures, thus an attempt was made to undermine the prestige of this Court and to shake the faith of the public in the independence of judiciary.

(3.) An application was filed by the contemnor I.A. No. 1583/2001 tendering unconditional apology. It was also mentioned that she is deleting the name of respondent No. 2, the then Chief Justice from the cause title and also Paragraphs 5.7,5.14, 5.16,5.17 and 6.1 of the petition. It was also submitted that she was replacing Para 4 by way of filing an amendment application. She has sent an application for voluntary retirement on 11-10-2001. In support of the application, an affidavit has also been filed by the contemnor. An additional affidavit has also been filed by the contemnor on 22-8-2004 pointing out that initially petition was drafted at Bombay under guidance of Shri A.K. Sakhare, his junior prepared and drafted the petition, petition (C-l) was drafted, thereafter it was corrected by yet another Counsel Shri Kuldeep Bhargava, an Advocate of Ujjain, it was notarized on 22-7-2000. Petition (C-2) was prepared. Shri Kuldeep Bhargava advised petition to be filed through some Counsel at Jabalpur. Shri Shukla, Sr. Counsel of this Court was approached and it was decided to file the same petition in the Court. However, petitioner discussed the matter with yet another Advocate Shri A.D. Deoras on being so advised. Shri Deoras has suggested that the petition does not contain the averments necessary to prove the malafide, therefore, substantial changes were made in the petition. He also impleaded the then Chief Justice of this Court. Similarly, the Counsel made changes in the petition.