In a significant ruling that underscores the need for judicial accountability, the Supreme Court of India has set aside an ante-dated order by the Gujarat High Court, while emphasizing the imperative for High Court judges to be paragons of rectitude, integrity, and professionalism. The case, Ratilal Jhaverbhai Parmar & Ors. v. State of Gujarat & Ors., Civil Appeal No. 11000 of 2024, highlighted procedural lapses in the timely pronouncement of reasoned judgments, raising broader concerns about maintaining judicial credibility.
Background of the Case
The appeal, filed by Ratilal Jhaverbhai Parmar and others, contested a judgment delivered by the Gujarat High Court in R/Special Civil Application No. 10912 of 2015. The original petition, challenging an order by the Deputy Collector, Kamrej Prant, Surat, was heard and dismissed by the High Court on March 1, 2023. However, appellants claimed that while the dismissal was pronounced verbally, a detailed reasoned order was only provided over a year later, on April 30, 2024.
This substantial delay prompted allegations of ante-dating, creating doubts about procedural propriety and transparency in judicial conduct. The case subsequently reached the Supreme Court, which examined the integrity of the judicial process and the need for strict adherence to judicial norms.
Legal Issues Involved
The Supreme Court’s ruling addressed several key legal and ethical issues:
1. Delayed Reasoned Judgments:
The delay in issuing the detailed judgment more than a year after the verbal pronouncement was a central issue. The Court held that such delays breach judicial norms and violate Article 21 of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to timely justice.
2. Ante-Dating of Judicial Orders:
The practice of issuing reasoned judgments with an ante-dated timeline compromises judicial credibility and transparency. The Supreme Court reiterated that such practices could erode public trust in the judiciary and emphasized that judgments must be delivered promptly to ensure fair proceedings.
3. Judicial Integrity and Professionalism:
The Court’s observations highlighted the ethical expectations from High Court judges, noting that judges must be “models of rectitude and integrity” and maintain unwavering principles, even under immense workloads.
Decision of the Supreme Court
A bench comprising Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra delivered the judgment on October 21, 2024. The Court ruled that the ante-dated order of March 1, 2023, by the Gujarat High Court was untenable and must be set aside. It directed that the petition be reinstated for rehearing by a different bench of the Gujarat High Court.
The Supreme Court’s decision emphasized that:
– The delayed delivery of reasoned judgments is a breach of constitutional rights and compromises access to justice.
– Judges must adhere to ethical standards that reflect integrity and fairness, serving as role models for the legal community and the public at large.
– High Court judges must avoid practices that bring the judiciary into disrepute, even in the face of challenging workloads.
Key Observations
In a stern rebuke, the Supreme Court remarked:
“The society expects every Judge of a high court to be a model of rectitude, an epitome of unimpeachable integrity and unwavering principles, a champion of moral excellence, and an embodiment of professionalism who can consistently deliver high-quality work guaranteeing justice.”
The Court added that instances of ante-dating, such as in this case, “bring disrepute to the judicial system and show the entire judiciary in poor light.” It emphasized that such lapses could have been avoided with “a little bit of care and caution.”
