Jammu and Kashmir High Court Expunges Remarks Against Fresh Law Graduate After Apology
Court Accepts Apology from Nikhil Padha, Acknowledging His Amateur Legal Drafting Skills and Genuine Intentions
In a significant turn of events, the Jammu and Kashmir High Court has expunged critical remarks previously made against Nikhil Padha, a fresh law graduate, who had filed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking the reopening of various commissions in Jammu and Kashmir. The decision came after Padha tendered an unqualified apology, which the court accepted as genuine and bona fide.
On October 8, 2025, Justices Arun Palli and Rajnesh Oswal presided over the case where Padha appeared in person, seeking to clear his name from the previous judgment dated September 8, 2021. The earlier judgment, which dismissed his petition with costs, had included scathing remarks questioning his credibility and accusing him of politically motivated intentions.
Padha, who graduated from Dogra Law College, University of Jammu, in 2021, had initially petitioned the court to reopen the Jammu and Kashmir Human Rights Commission, Women Commission, Accountability Commission, and State Information Commission. He also advocated for the continuation of pending cases and the establishment of an independent body with branches across the region. However, the court had dismissed the petition, imposing costs and recording adverse remarks against Padha.
The Supreme Court, upon appeal, granted Padha the liberty to tender an unqualified apology to the High Court, recognizing the potential adverse impact of the remarks on his career prospects. Padha, in his affidavit, expressed regret for his lack of legal drafting skills and acknowledged that the petition was not appropriately presented.
The High Court, considering Padha's amateur nature in legal drafting and his genuine remorse, decided to expunge the remarks. The court took a sympathetic view, noting Padha's active involvement in social activities and his work with various quasi-judicial bodies. The court emphasized that the unqualified apology was genuine and bona fide, thus warranting the deletion of the adverse observations.
This decision marks a significant relief for Padha, who is at the threshold of his legal career. The expunged remarks will not hinder his future prospects, allowing him to continue practicing law without the shadow of past criticisms.
Bottom Line:
Public Interest Litigation - Remarks made against a petitioner who was a fresh law graduate seeking the reopening of commissions in Jammu and Kashmir were expunged on his tendering an unqualified apology - The court accepted the apology as genuine and bona fide, considering the amateur nature of the legal drafting and the over-enthusiasm of the petitioner.
Statutory provision(s): Public Interest Litigation
