Read Time: 05 minutes

Synopsis

In a cautionary statement, the Allahabad High Court reminded advocates of their duty to uphold the judiciary’s reputation, emphasizing that any lapse in disclosure risks casting doubts on judges’ impartiality. Court’s observation arose from a procedural oversight in a case, where incomplete information led to the unintentional dismissal of an appeal as withdrawn.

The case, involving counsels Manish Kumar Nigam and Rahul Sahai for the appellants, and Neeraj Agarwal for the respondents, was listed before Justice Kshitij Shailendra, who had previously represented respondent No. 1 before his elevation to the bench in February 2023. When Siddharth Srivastava, appearing on behalf of Sahai, moved to withdraw the appeal, he did not disclose that Justice Shailendra had earlier served as counsel for the respondents. Trusting the counsel’s representation, the court allowed the withdrawal, unaware of this potential conflict of interest.

Justice Shailendra later learned of his prior involvement through the Bench Secretary and revisited the case records, confirming that he had once been deeply engaged in related proceedings for the respondents, even participating in lengthy hearings and reserving judgment in a connected matter. This past involvement, the judge noted, could have necessitated assigning the case to a different bench.

In his order, Justice Shailendra expressed disappointment, reminding the legal fraternity that “the Bar and the Bench are complementary,” with a shared responsibility to uphold justice. He stressed that it is the “pious duty” of lawyers to ensure that “the image of a judge in the public eye is not questioned,” warning that any lack of transparency might give rise to perceptions that judges are swayed by cases they previously argued. The court highlighted how a single oversight could undermine public trust in the judiciary’s objectivity.

While issuing a warning to Srivastava, Justice Shailendra refrained from harsher action, noting that the mistake might have been inadvertent. He advised the young advocate to take greater care in his future court appearances, emphasizing that the “Court and its proceedings cannot be taken for granted.”

The judge ordered the matter to be reassigned to another bench, with instructions to list it before a new judge in December, following approval from the Chief Justice.

Case Title: Rajneesh Kumar And Others Vs Santosh Kumar And Others