Litigants who sought to transfer a lawsuit to a different trial court, alleging collusion between the presiding judge and an opposing attorney, were fined ₹10,000 for court costs. In a recent ruling (Babulal vs. Shri Mahaveer Jain Swetamber Pedhi Trust), the Rajasthan High Court emphasized the importance of critically assessing judgments while condemning the act of criticizing judges.
Justice Dr. Nupur Bhati highlighted the expectation for attorneys to exercise restraint and avoid making accusations against judges. The Court stressed the need to discourage baseless accusations against judicial officers, as such actions undermine the justice system’s integrity.
The petition before the High Court involved a challenge to a district court’s decision regarding the management of a temple trust. It included a request for a different judge due to alleged collaboration between the presiding officer and an attorney in disregarding the finality of summons service.
After thorough review, the High Court upheld the trial court’s decision on the adequacy of summons service and refused to transfer the case. It admonished the petitioners for attempting to malign the judge to secure a transfer and advised them to challenge the decision through proper legal channels.
The Court also noted a complaint filed by the Jalore Bar against the presiding officer, pending consideration by the Chief Justice, but emphasized that such matters should not influence judicial proceedings.
Additionally, referencing the Judicial Officers Protection Act, the Court reaffirmed judges’ immunity, emphasizing the principle of autonomous duty execution.
Consequently, the Court ordered the petitioners to deposit ₹10,000 in court costs with the Rajasthan State Legal Services Authority in Jodhpur. Attorneys Swati Shekhar and CS Kotwani supported the petitioners.
