Premium

SC sets aside dismissal of MP judge, warns against disciplining judicial officers merely for wrong orders

The Supreme Court’s decision came on an appeal by Nirbhay Singh Suliya, who was removed as an additional district and sessions judge in Madhya Pradesh in 2014.

2 min readJan 5, 2026 02:24 PM IST

Justice Viswanathan said that such exercise of disciplinary powers can have a chilling effect on the independence of the district judiciary and discourage its judges from exercising discretion, especially in matters of bail.

Mere error in judgment or wrong order should not invite disciplinary proceedings against judges, the Supreme Court said Monday as it set aside the 2014 dismissal of a Madhya Pradesh judicial officer.

“Caution must be exercised by the High Courts in initiating disciplinary proceedings. It should be ensured that only because an order is wrong or there is an error of judgment without anything more, judicial officer is not put through the ordeal of such proceedings,” the bench of Justices J B Pardiwala and K V Viswanathan said.

The decision came on an appeal by Nirbhay Singh Suliya, who was removed as an additional district and sessions judge on charges of corruption and for “double standard” in deciding bail applications under the Excise Act.

A disciplinary inquiry found that while he granted bail in some cases involving seizure of more than 50 bulk litres of liquor, the judicial officer rejected bail applications in many other similar cases, citing the large quantity.

In his concurring judgment, Justice Pardiwala said, “The High Court, which is vested with the supervisory control, must keep in mind that the judicial officer of the district Judiciary works mostly in a charged atmosphere. A mere wrong order or wrong exercise of discretion in the grant of bail by itself without anything more cannot be a ground to initiate departmental proceedings.”

The judge added, “It should not happen that because of the lurking fear in the mind of a trial court judge of some administrative action being taken that even in deserving cases well within the principles of law, bail is declined. This is one reason why the High Courts are flooded with bail applications. The same is the scenario in the Supreme Court.”

Ananthakrishnan G

Ananthakrishnan G. is a Senior Assistant Editor with The Indian Express. He has been in the field for over 23 years, kicking off his journalism career as a freelancer in the late nineties with bylines in The Hindu. A graduate in law, he practised in the District judiciary in Kerala for about two years before switching to journalism. His first permanent assignment was with The Press Trust of India in Delhi where he was assigned to cover the lower courts and various commissions of inquiry. He reported from the Delhi High Court and the Supreme Court of India during his first stint with The Indian Express in 2005-2006. Currently, in his second stint with The Indian Express, he reports from the Supreme Court and writes on topics related to law and the administration of justice. Legal reporting is his forte though he has extensive experience in political and community reporting too, having spent a decade as Kerala state correspondent, The Times of India and The Telegraph. He is a stickler for facts and has several impactful stories to his credit. ... Read More