File Copyright Online - File mutual Divorce in Delhi - Online Legal Advice - Lawyers in India

Judicial Magistrate’s Judgments and Order to be monitored by the Sessions Judge

In a contempt petition filed by the Petitioner against the Judicial Magistrate, the High Court observed that the Judicial Magistrate did not acknowledge any of the superior courts judgments that are binding on him. Thus, the Bombay High Court instructed the Sessions Judge to monitor all the judgments and orders passed by the magistrate for one year0. This was laid down in the case of Yogesh Waman Athavle Vs. Vikram Abasaheb Jadhav & Ors., Contempt Petition No. 127 of 2019.

The facts of the case are that the Petitioner is an advocate practicing in the court of the Judicial Magistrate that is the Respondent in the case. The Petitioner contented that on several occasions the Petitioner cited and submitted judgments of the superior courts but the Magistrate wilfully ignored the judgments and failed to follow precedents laid down by the superior courts.

The Petitioner presented 4 instances where the Magistrate consistently and wilfully did not follow the binding precedent laid down by the superior courts. Hence, the Petitioner filed a contempt petition against the Magistrate under Article 215 of the constitution and several sections of the Contempt of Court's Act, 1971. The Respondent had argued that the actions of the Magistrate have already been noted and he has been summoned and counseled by the Principal Judge of the district.

The Division bench of the Bombay High Court took note of the actions of the judicial magistrate and stated that the actions of the magistrate display non application of the ‘judicial mind'. The court further stated that:
“We prima facie intuitively feel that learned Counsel for the petitioner is right when he laments approach of respondent No.1 vis-a-vis the above-noted authorities/ pronouncements. Common sense would prompt the conclusion that respondent No.1 ought to have carefully gone through the decisions and the ratio laid down therein and then would have formed an opinion about the applicability or otherwise of the same.”

The court did not take any action against the magistrate as there was no unwarranted remarks by him and nor was there any wilful disobedience by him. However, the High Court instructed the Principal District and Sessions Judge to review the performance of the Magistrate and to review all his judgments and orders for a period of one year and in case of any misconduct the same must be reported to the High Court.

Written By: Prime Legal Law Firm
Off Address: 39/2, 2nd floor, K G Road, Bengaluru, Karnataka-560001
Phone no: +9986386002, Email: [email protected]

Law Article in India

Ask A Lawyers

You May Like

Legal Question & Answers

Lawyers in India - Search By City

Copyright Filing
Online Copyright Registration


Section 482 CrPc - Quashing Of FIR: Guid...


The Inherent power under Section 482 in The Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (37th Chapter of th...

How To File For Mutual Divorce In Delhi


How To File For Mutual Divorce In Delhi Mutual Consent Divorce is the Simplest Way to Obtain a D...

Whether Caveat Application is legally pe...


Whether in a criminal proceeding a Caveat Application is legally permissible to be filed as pro...

The Factories Act,1948


There has been rise of large scale factory/ industry in India in the later half of nineteenth ce...

Copyright: An important element of Intel...


The Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) has its own economic value when it puts into any market ...

Constitution of India-Freedom of speech ...


Explain The Right To Freedom of Speech and Expression Under The Article 19 With The Help of Dec...

Lawyers Registration
Lawyers Membership - Get Clients Online

File caveat In Supreme Court Instantly