look news india
Prayagraj, June 09 (HS). The Allahabad High Court, while accepting an application for anticipatory bail, has said that inconsistent judicial orders can lead to discrimination between accused persons. Especially when the facts and circumstances are the same or similar.
The court said that such inconsistent orders undermine the public perception about the impartiality and integrity of the judicial system. Not only this, the High Court said that an officer who discriminates in judicial work commits gross misconduct.
While granting the anticipatory bail application, a single bench of Justice Krishna Pahal observed, “The judicial system rests on the trust of the citizens. Citizens and litigants expect that they will be given judicial orders which follow the rule of law and fair process. Inconsistent judicial orders may lead to discrimination between accused persons, especially when the facts and circumstances are the same or similar.
The High Court said that trust in the judiciary is the cornerstone of a democratic society. When citizens bring their grievances to court, they trust that the judiciary will dispense fair and consistent justice. This trust is lost when judicial orders are inconsistent, leading to a sense of bias or partiality. Inconsistent orders may result in unequal treatment of similarly situated persons, which violates the principle of equality before the law enshrined in Article 14 of the Indian Constitution. Such discrimination not only harms the persons directly affected, but also undermines public perception of the impartiality and integrity of the judicial system.”
In the present case, the trial court had rejected the anticipatory bail of the applicant Abhishek Yadav alias Lalu. However, twenty days earlier, the application for anticipatory bail to the co-accused was allowed. The applicant was not even named in the FIR and the allegation against the applicant Abhishek Yadav was the same as that against the co-accused who was not named in the FIR like the applicant. Therefore, the applicant filed an anticipatory bail plea in a case registered at Gopiganj, Bhadohi under Sections 147, 323, 336, 308, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.
The Court noted the phenomenon of inconsistent bail orders passed by trial courts and observed, “It is a settled principle of law that judicial pronouncements should be consistent. The issue of consistency in judicial proceedings is directly linked to fairness and fair procedure. Fairness of judicial proceedings is vital to the confidence of litigants. Criminal proceedings challenge the action of the State to protect the liberty of the individual. Once the liberty of an individual is protected by Article 21 of the Constitution, it is essential that the courts do not subject the litigants to inconsistent orders.”
The court said that this is gross misconduct by a judicial officer, which manifests itself in discriminatory behaviour in judicial functions. This is a serious breach of duty and violates the ethical standards expected of the judiciary and harms the fundamental principles of justice. The court said that ensuring consistency in judicial decisions is important to maintain the credibility of the legal system and maintain public confidence in its processes. Accordingly, the court allowed the applicant's application for anticipatory bail.