The Supreme Court on Wednesday expunged some "scandalous" and "unwarranted" observations made against the apex court by a single judge bench of the Punjab and Haryana high court in a contempt case, saying it was "pained" by these remarks.
A five-judge special bench headed by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud took suo motu note of the remarks and said these observations of Justice Rajbir Sehrawat of the high court were a "matter of grave concern".
Observing that no court including the high courts and the Supreme Court is "supreme", the bench, also comprising Justices Sanjiv Khanna, BR Gavai, Surya Kant and Hrishikesh Roy, said such observations were wholly unnecessary for the conduct of the proceedings before the high court and moreover, the Constitution is "supreme".
It, however, did not issue a notice and initiate proceedings against the high court judge for his "scandalous" observations at this stage.
"We, accordingly, expunge the observations which have been made by Justice Sehrawat in the order dated July 17, 2024 and expect a greater caution should be exercised in future while dealing with orders of the Supreme Court and for that matter, the orders passed by a division bench of the high court," the bench said.
The top court noted it has been apprised that a division bench presided over by the high court's Chief Justice has taken suo motu notice of his observations and stayed his order.
It said every judge is bound by the discipline which the hierarchical nature of judicial system proposes on judicial functioning.
"Judicial discipline in the context of the hierarchial nature of the judicial system is intended to preserve the dignity of all institutions whether district courts, the high courts or the level of the Supreme Court," the bench said.
"We are of the view that observations which were made in the order of the single judge ... was totally unnecessary for the ultimate order which was passed," it said, adding the gratuitous observations were absolutely unwarranted.
It said parties may be aggrieved by an order but the judges can never be aggrieved by an order of a superior court.
The bench said such observations bring entire judicial machinery into disrepute and affects not only the dignity of the apex court but high courts as well.
It said the principles governing the comity between the high courts and the Supreme Court as the apex judicial institutions have been held in numerous decisions.
It noted the adverse impact of the July 17 order got compounded further with the circulation of a video about random, gratuitous and unnecessary observations made by the single judge during the hearing.
"In an age where there is widespread reporting of every proceedings which takes place in a court, particularly in the context of live streaming ... it is all the more necessary that the judges exercise due restraint and responsibility in the observations which are made in the court during the course of proceedings," the bench said.
It said observations which have reflected in the video can cause "incalculable harm to the sanctity of the judicial process".
"We hope and trust that such circumspection would be observed in the future," the bench said.
As the bench assembled, the CJI observed, "We are pained by the observations made by the single judge of the Punjab and Haryana High Court while proceeding in contempt jurisdiction."
Attorney General R Venkataramani, who appeared in the matter along with Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, referred to the observations and said this matter deserves the apex court's intervention.
Justice Khanna observed Indian judiciary have an appellate court system and order passed by higher courts have to be complied with.
"The last part (of the high court order) does say that but unnecessary observations have been made with regard to so many things...," he said.
The CJI observed though the July 17 order has been stayed, the apex court was of the view that it was not really about a particular judge but about "this tendency of gratuitous observations" on the work of the Supreme Court.
He said, "All high courts and district courts works in a hierarchical judicial system. We all have been judges of the high courts. That discipline has to be maintained".
Referring to the objectionable part of the order, Justice Roy said no courts, including the Supreme Court, is supreme.
"The supremacy is actually of the Constitution. We are all below the Constitution and our task is to interpret the Constitution as we understand...," he said.
The observations by Justice Sehrawat were made after a top court bench had in May stayed the contempt proceedings pending before the high court.
The genesis of today's proceedings can be traced to a contempt case filed initially on February 12, 2021 in the high court seeking punishment for alleged contemnors for wilful violation of a 2016 judgment with regard to sale of a property in Gurugram.
The plea had sought declaration of sale deed as illegal.
The single judge, on May 29, ordered the property in question forthwith be taken over by the Haryana government, besides that no court shall entertain "any suit, appeal, petition or application of any kind" with regard to it.
Later, the matter went in appeal before a division bench.
The single judge bench adjourned the hearing on the main plea keeping in mind the pendency of case before a division bench.
However, the single judge bench orally observed the division bench's order was "rubbish" and should be declared "non-est" (not found).
