The Supreme Court has declined to intervene in the Delhi High Court’s decision. A Delhi Judge sought relief by filing a petition in the Supreme Court’s bench of Justices Harikishan Roy and Pankaj Mittal. However, the Supreme Court declined to intervene in the High Court’s decision.
Actually, the Judge and his wife took a foreign trip in 2016. When he returned, he became stuck while delivering the report to his boss. There was an error in the hotel booking in the documents he submitted. It was unknown who paid the 5 star hotel bill. The matter was under investigation. According to the inquiry officer’s report, the judge accepted a favour from a stranger.
On the basis of the inquiry report, the Delhi High Court fired the Judge. According to the High Court, the judge should remember that he is a judge. Someone is also judging him. A judicial officer should always remember not to accept any favours from anyone.
However, the judge stated in his defence that the person who paid his hotel bill was a brother acquaintance. He stated that he was required to repay the debt owed by the person who paid the hotel bill. The judge also stated that he attempted to return the money while abroad, but the person who paid the bill stated that he would take back all of the money spent on his return.
According to the High Court’s order, the judge admitted to taking a favour from a stranger. However, he was unable to explain why he had done so. This alone is sufficient to convict the judge. According to the High Court, if no action is taken, the wrong message will be sent.