Divinity of a Judge
- Part 1 -

A Romenkumar Singh *

The High Court Complex at Chingmeirong Imphal on April 07 2012 :: Pix - Bullu Raj

A Judge who has not committed an error is yet to be born : Justice Bhandari
(2008) 17SCC538-Para 58 (VIII)

A. In India, we equate our Judges with divinity where it comes to administration of justice, judicial law making may lose its sanctity if it is found that our Gods have feet of Day (AIR 2012 Journal 83). A judge must be of sterner stuff. His mental equipoise must always remain firm and undetected. He should not allow his personal prejudice to go into the decision making. The object is not merely that the scales be held even; it is also that they may not appear to be inclined. (2011) 8 SCC 380 Para 241.A Judge is to decide every dispute in consonance with law. If one is not free to decide in consonance with his will, but must decide in consonance with law, the concept of a JUDGE being an individual possessing power and authority, is but a delusion. (2014)8 SCC 470, Para 15.A member of the higher judiciary who is equated with divinity is expected to possess the qualities of super human being. In the matchless words of August Vollmer the qualities of super human beings are:-

1. Wisdom of Solomon;
2. Courage of David;
3. Strength of Samson;
4. Patience of Jacob;
5. Leadership of Mosses;
6. Kindness of Good Samaritan;
7. Strategical Training of Alexander;
8. Diplomacy of Lincoln;
9. Tolerance of Carpenter of Nazarath;

And intimate knowledge of every branch of natural, biological and social sciences.

B. Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere - Martin Luther King Jr

A Judge, like Caesar's wife, must be above suspicion
(2012) 8 SCC 58 – Para 70 – Para 29

Judicial service is not an ordinary government service and the Judges are not employees as such. Judges hold the public office; their function is one of the essential functions of the state. In discharge of their functions and duties, the Judges represent the state. The office that a Judge holds is an office of public trust. A Judge must be a person of impeccable integrity and unimpeachable independence. He must be honest to the core with high moral values. When a litigant enters the court room, he must feel secured that the Judge before whom his matter has come, would deliver justice impartially and uninfluenced by any consideration.

C. CONDUCT OF JUDGE IS HIGHER THAN AN ORDINARY MAN

The Standard of conduct expected of a Judge is much higher than an ordinary man. There is no excuse that since the standards in the society have fallen, the Judges who are drawn from the society cannot be expected to have high standards and ethical firmness required of a Judge.

A Judge, like CAESAR'S WIFE must be above suspicion. The credibility of the judicial system is dependent upon the Judges who man it.

For a democracy to thrive and the rule of law to survive, justice system and the judicial process have to be strong and every Judge must discharge his judicial functions with integrity, impartiality and intellectual honesty.

D. JUDGE MUST BE A JURIST ENDOWED WITH THE LEGISLATOR'S WISDOM.

In a case as reported in Ashok Kumar Gupta V. State of U.P, (1997)5 SCC 201 at page 243 – 13th sentence it was observed that Judge must be a jurist endowed with the legislator's wisdom, historian's search for truth, prophet's vision. While reflecting the judicial independence, the Supreme Court in State of Himachal Pradesh V. Umed Ram Sharma, AIR 1986 S.C. 847 at page. 855 – Para 36 – Sub – Para held that "The Judge even when is free, is still not wholly free. He is not to innovate at will in pursuit of his own ideal of beauty or of goodness. He is to draw inspiration from consecrated principles. He is not to yield to spasmodic sentiment, to vague and unregulated benevolence. He is to exercise a discretion informed by tradition, methodized by analogy, disciplined by system, and subordinated to the primordial necessity of order in the social life. Wide enough in all conscience is the field of discretion that remains.

E. JUDGE'S OFFICIAL AND PERSONAL CONDUCT MUST BE THE HIGHEST STANDARD OF PROPRIETY.

The Judicial officer beingnot an ordinary person is required to maintain highest standard of propriety and probity. In the case of Arundhati Ashok WalaValkar V. State of Maharastra, (2011) 11 SCC 324 where the appellant Magistrate found travelling in local train without ticket thrice and on detection misusing her official identity card, creating unnecessary scenes on platform and threatening railway staff. Held, such behaviour constituted grave misconduct unbecoming of a judicial officer and punishment of compulsory retirement is not disproportionate to the offences alleged. While upholding the punishment the Supreme Court held:
In a country governed by the rule of law, nobody is above the law, including judicial officers. In fact, as judicial officers, they have to present a continuous aspect a dignity in every conduct. If the rule of law is to function effectively and efficiently under the aegis of our democratic set-up, Judges are expected to, nay, they must nurture an efficient and enlightened judiciary by presenting themselves as a role model. Needless to say, a judge is constantly under public gaze and society aspects higher standards of conduct and rectitude from a judge.

Judicial office, being an office of public trust, the society is entitled to expect that a Judge must be a man of high integrity, honesty and ethical firmness by maintaining the most exacting standards of propriety in every action. Therefore, a judge's official and personal conduct must be in tune with the highest standard of propriety and probity. Obviously, the standard of conduct is higher than those deemed acceptable or obvious for others.

F. JUDGES BRINGING BAD NAME TO THE INSTITUTION MUST BE THROWN OUT OF JUDICIARY.

In Atma Ram Builders Private Ltd. V. A.K. Tuli, (2011)6 SCC 385 while dealing with the malpractices at the lower judiciary, the Supreme Court at page. 388 Para 10, held:
We are constrained to say that a certain section of the subordinate judiciary in this country is bringing the whole judiciary of India into disrepute by passing orders on extraneous considerations. We do not wish to comment on the various allegations which are often made to us about what certain members of the subordinate judiciary are doing but we do want to say that these kind of malpractices have to be totally weeded out.

Such subordinate judiciary Judges are bringing a bad name to the whole institution and must be thrown out of the judiciary.

G. JUDGE MUST NOT BE SWAYED BY ANGER AND HOSTILITY.

In Lanka Venkateswarlu (Dead) by LRs V. State of Andhra Pradesh, (2011) 4 SCC 363 while dealing with the case of condoning delay the Supreme Court at page 373 Para 31 held:-
Judges at all levels in this country subscribe to an oath when entering upon office of Judgeship, to do justice without fear or favour, ill will or malice. This commitment in form of a solemn oath is to ensure that Judges base their opinions on objectivity and impartiality. The first casualty of prejudice is objectivity and impartiality. It is also well known that anger deprives a human being of his ability to reason. Judges being human are not immune to such disability. It is of most importance that in expressing their opinions, Judges and Magistrate be guided only by the considerations of doing justice.

H. A JUDGE SHOULD NOT BE A SPECTATOR AND RECORDING MACHINE

While examining the adversary system of criminal justice in Mohd.Hussain @ Alas Zulfikar Ali V. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi), (2012) 2SCC 584 at Page 622 Para 54 the Supreme Court held that the learned Judge in Seisin of the trail forgot that he has an overriding duty to maintain public confidence in the administration of justice, often referred to as a duty to vindicate and uphold the majesty of law. He failed to realise that for an effective instrument in dispensing justice he must cease to be a spectator and a recording machine but a participant in the trial evincing intelligence and active interest so as to elicit all relevant materials necessary for reaching the correct conclusion, to find out the truth and administer justice with fairness and impartiality both to the parties and to the community itself.

I. FOR DEALING WITH EXTRAORDINARY SITUATIONS COURT SHOULD INNOVATE LAW.

While dealing with the extraordinary situations as reported in Prithipal Singh V. State of Punjab, (2012) 1 SCC 10 at page 29 Para 50 the Supreme Court held that extraordinary situations demand extraordinary remedies. While dealing with an unprecedented case, the Court has to innovate the law and may also pass an unconventional order keeping in mind that an extraordinary fact situation requires extraordinary measures. In B.P. AchalaAnand V.S.Appi Reddy, (2002) 7 SCC 157 this court observed: (SCC 318, Para 1): "unusual fact situation posing issues for resolution is an opportunity for innovation. Law, as administered by courts, transforms into justice.

J. JUSTICE DELIVERY SYSTEM IS THE BEDROCK OF THE RULE OF LAW.

The Supreme Court while undertaking the exercise of ascertaining about the infrastructural projects about the subordinate judiciary, the Apex Court in All India Judges Association and Union of India, (2010) 14 SCC 705 Para 1 held that Justice Delivery System is the bedrock of the rule of law, which is held to be basic structure of the Constitution and it is our view that, in the absence of adequate judicial infrastructure, particularly, for the subordinate Courts, it would not be possible to sustain rule of law in this country.

It is true that Courts do not generally issue directions in financial matters, however, we are of the view that Court fees, costs and fines constitute what is called "MEASURE" of what is spent on judicial infrastructure. This would be in consonance of doctrine of proportionality, which is the facet of doctrine of reasonableness under the Constitution. The rule of law assures the citizen of an effective civil and criminal justice system and judicial infrastructure is the cornerstone of justice delivery system without which the rule of law in this Court would fail.

To be continued....