Court Rules Sessions Judge Exceeded Jurisdiction, Nullifies Orders Beyond Bail Application Scope
In a significant ruling aimed at curbing judicial overreach, the Delhi High Court, presided over by Justice Saurabh Banerjee, has set aside orders passed by an Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) from Dwarka Courts related to an anticipatory bail application. The High Court emphasized that the Sessions Judge had become functus officio—a legal term indicating that a court or official has exhausted its authority—after disposing of the anticipatory bail application and thus lacked jurisdiction to issue further directions, such as departmental inquiries and adverse remarks against police officials.
The case arose from an FIR registered on June 21, 2019, concerning the disappearance of a minor, which led to the arrest and subsequent legal proceedings against several individuals, including police officials accused of delaying the investigation. The ASJ had continued to issue orders related to the case even after disposing of the bail application, including calling for status reports and initiating departmental inquiries against police officers involved in the investigation.
The petitioners, including Inspector Aishvir Singh, challenged these actions, arguing that they were beyond the ASJ's jurisdiction and violated principles of natural justice by not providing an opportunity to be heard before making adverse remarks. The High Court agreed with the petitioners, emphasizing that the scope of a court's jurisdiction in bail matters is limited to granting or denying bail and does not extend to monitoring investigations or disciplinary actions, which are administrative functions of the police.
Justice Banerjee's judgment underscored the necessity for courts to refrain from making disparaging remarks unless absolutely necessary and relevant to the case at hand, as such remarks can have lasting impacts on the reputations and careers of public servants. The court also noted the importance of adhering to established judicial boundaries to maintain the integrity of the legal process.
The High Court's decision to nullify the ASJ's orders and expunge adverse remarks serves as a reminder of the judiciary's role in upholding justice without encroaching on administrative functions. The ruling has been circulated among district judges to ensure similar overreach does not occur in future cases, reinforcing the principle that judicial actions must remain within the confines of the law.
Bottom line:-
A Sessions Court becomes functus officio once it disposes of an anticipatory bail application and cannot pass further directions such as ordering departmental enquiries, monitoring investigations, or making adverse remarks beyond its jurisdiction.
Statutory provision(s):
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 482
Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 363, 328, 376
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 - Section 4
Aishvir Singh (Inspector) v. State, (Delhi) : Law Finder Doc id # 2902644
