HC removes Stigma: Relief can’t depend on who Approaches Court

The Rajasthan High Court has set aside adverse remarks and disciplinary directions issued against a senior police officer by an NDPS Court in Jhalawar, holding that censuring a public servant without granting a prior hearing violates basic principles of natural justice, an order that reinforces procedural fairness in judicial criticism of officials.

The case arose from a criminal miscellaneous petition filed by an Additional Superintendent of Police who was aggrieved by a 2023 judgment of the Special Judge (NDPS), Jhalawar, which had acquitted accused persons in a narcotics case but went a step further by recording severe observations against the officer’s conduct and directing the Director General of Police, Rajasthan, to initiate disciplinary proceedings under the General Rules (Civil and Criminal), 2018.

The officer argued that these remarks, which had serious career implications, were made without issuing any notice or affording him an opportunity to explain his actions, rendering the directions legally unsustainable.

After examining the record, the High Court held that the trial court had clearly breached settled law by making castigating remarks without hearing the affected officers. Relying on Apex Court precedent, the Court reiterated that before recording strictures that may prejudice a person’s future, a hearing is mandatory, noting that otherwise such remarks offend natural justice.

Emphasising parity and Article 21 protections, the Court extended identical relief to another officer against whom similar remarks were passed, observing that “before any castigating remarks are made by the court… he should be given an opportunity of hearing.”

Consequently, the Court quashed the adverse remarks and disciplinary directions contained in the trial court’s judgment, while clarifying that the competent disciplinary authority remains free to examine the matter independently, strictly in accordance with law and due process.

Case Title: Vimal Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan And Ors. 

Case No.: S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 4531/2023

Coram:  Hon'ble Mr. Justice Anil Kumar Upman,

Advocate for the Petitioner: Adv. Anurag Sharma, Adv. Akshat Sharma,  Adv.Anoop Meena, 

Advocate for the Respondent: PP M.S. Shekhawat,

Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com