Allahabad HC Pulls Up Judge for Conducting Trial Despite Dispute Settlement Between Parties
Allahabad High Court slaps Chief Judicial Magistrate for not respecting compromise between accused, victim in case of simple hurt and criminal intimidation case.
The High Court observed that instead of passing an order on the compromise application filed by the parties as directed by it, the ACJM/Additional Civil Judge has preferred to conduct trial in the case. This was done when Counsel for the accused had informed her that “he will get his fees” only when matter goes for trial.
“It was submitted that learned Presiding Officer (Judicial Magistrate First Class, Fatehpur) ultimately acquitted the accused after trial,” the bench of Justice Raj Beer Singh said in the order.
The High Court said that in the judgment passed by her on 31.08.2021,
“…. the learned Judge had completely disregarded and violated the order of this Court in a very flagrant and blatant manner and also in utter disregard to the provisions of law.”
It added that the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class stated that the parties had not pressed for compromise whereas the Trial Judge made a false statement in her explanation. Court noted that order passed by the trial Court itself speak that the compromise application was filed and verified by the Presiding Officer.
“The statement made by the Presiding Officer again speak volumes about the fact that she has least regard to the order passed by this Court and in order to facilitate payment of fees to the counsel for accused, she put the applicants/accused on trial without passing any order on the said compromise application which was duly verified,” the Court stated.
Furthermore, the High Court observed that when the parties have approached this Court to quash the proceedings against them on the very basis of compromise, it cannot be believed that parties would not press the compromise application and prefer to undergo trial.
“It appears that Counsel for accused parties wanted fees from his clients and upon such illegal and arbitrary request, the trial Court put the accused parties on trial and thereafter decided the matter on merits,” the Court added while observing that in the said explanation, the Presiding Officer has also stated that….
“In the said explanation submitted by the learned Presiding Officer, it is also mentioned that learned counsel for accused stated that he will get his fees and the matter be decided after recording hostile statements of the witnesses andupon suchrequest by the counsel for accused, the trial Court proceeded for trial”.
The High Court made the above said observations while dealing with an application under section 482 CrPC moved by one of the accused praying to recall the order passed by this Court on 08.08.20 25 whereby the proceedings against him were quashed on the basis of compromise.
The High Court had come to know that instead of deciding the matter on the basis of compromise as directed by it, the trial Judge framed the charges against the accused and thereafter decided the matter on merits.
Terming her conduct as unbecoming of a Judicial Officer as she put the accused persons on trial in illegal and arbitrary manner, the Court said that the Counsel representing Advocate General appearing for High Court has informed the Court that she has apologised for her conduct.
“He further added that the learned ACJM has a long career and analyzing the factum of apology tendered by her, the Court may accept her apology.”
On a note of the apology tendered by the judge, the High Court said that no further action was required to be taken against the learned Judge.
The Court however warned her to be careful in future conduct.
“So far question of recall of order dated 08.08.2025 is concerned, as the case has already been decided by the trial Court, the prayer to recall the order dated 08.08.20 25 is refused,” the Bench ordered.
Abdul Majid, Advocate appeared for the applicants.
Sudhir Mehrotra, Advocate appeared for the High Court.
