The trial court had observed that the petitioner, a Station House Officer, was trying to pass on his responsibility of reporting of service to the court, to the Summons Pool in a case registered under Negotiable Instruments Act. This was in violation of standing orders, the court had said.
It then passed certain remarks impeaching the credibility of the petitioner as a police officer, and even directed the Commissioner of Delhi Police to take corrective measures against him and place the report before the trial court.
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma underlined that every word in a judicial order forms a permanent record and said that use of denigrating remarks against anyone impeaching their credibility is not the best course adopted by a judicial officer, especially when it’s not required for adjudication of the case.
“Every word forming part of a judicial order forms permanent record. Use of denigrating remarks against anyone, especially against police officials impeaching their credibility and questioning their sense of dedication towards duty, is not the best course adopted by a judicial officer, that too when the same is not required for the adjudication of the case before the Court. Such criticism may have a devastating effect on the professional career of an officer. It is also bound to have everlasting affect on the reputation of a person,” the Court stated.
Source: Barandbench
