A group of judges of the Allahabad High Court has written to Chief Justice Arun Bhansali, urging him to convene a Full Court meeting in response to the Supreme Court’s recent order targeting Justice Prashant Kumar.
The apex court, in an order dated August 4, had made strong observations against Justice Kumar’s judicial reasoning and further directed the High Court administration to remove him from the criminal roster. It also asked that he be assigned to a Division Bench alongside a senior judge until his retirement.
The directions were issued by a Bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan while hearing a petition filed by M/s Shikhar Chemicals. The company had approached the Supreme Court seeking to quash criminal proceedings initiated over a commercial dispute.
The High Court had earlier dismissed the company’s plea, with Justice Prashant Kumar holding that compelling the complainant to pursue a civil remedy would be “very unreasonable,” and that criminal proceedings could be allowed to recover the dues. The Supreme Court overturned this reasoning, stating:
“We are shocked by the findings recorded in paragraph 12 of the impugned order… The judge has gone to the extent of stating that asking the complainant to pursue civil remedy would be very unreasonable as civil suits take a long time, and therefore the complainant may be permitted to institute criminal proceedings for recovery.”
The top court found this approach “untenable,” set aside the High Court’s order, and directed that the matter be heard afresh by a different judge.
High Court Judges Express Dismay
The Supreme Court’s directive, particularly on the administrative handling of rosters, has triggered concern within the Allahabad High Court. According to official sources, Justice Arindam Sinha wrote to Chief Justice Arun Bhansali on Thursday, registering his “shock and pain” over the August 4 order.
In the letter, Justice Sinha pointed out:
“Subject order dated 4th August, 2025 was made without direction for issuance of notice and contains scathing findings against the learned Judge.”
He suggested that a Full Court meeting should resolve not to comply with the direction to alter Justice Kumar’s roster, stating that the Supreme Court does not exercise administrative superintendence over High Courts. The letter also proposed that the High Court formally express its displeasure regarding “the tone and tenor” of the Supreme Court’s remarks.
Twelve other judges have co-signed the letter, lending collective weight to the demand for institutional independence.
Roster Changes Implemented
Despite the objection, changes to Justice Kumar’s roster have already been implemented. As per the revised schedule, he will sit with Justice M.C. Tripathi on August 7 and 8 to hear cases relating to land acquisition, development authorities, and environmental issues. The criminal matters earlier assigned to him are now being heard by Justice Dinesh Pathak.
Supreme Court to Hear Case Again
The matter has not ended with the August 4 order. The Supreme Court has re-listed the case involving Justice Kumar for further hearing on Friday. Meanwhile, there are reports that the order has caused disquiet even among judges of the Supreme Court, who are said to have questioned the propriety of issuing administrative directions through a judicial pronouncement.
