High Court takes serious view of alleged pressure on judge
The Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court has referred a matter for consideration under criminal contempt after civil judge (senior division) Shabina Khan of Gonda alleged she was pressured in connection with a long-pending land dispute. The court, in an order passed by Justice Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi on August 21, said the alleged pressure exerted by Devipatan Divisional Commissioner Durga Shakti Nagpal – a senior IAS officer – constituted prima facie a direct attack on the independence of the judiciary and created a hindrance in the administration of justice.
According to Hindustan Times, the court observed that the tone and language of the conversation described by the judge indicated an attempt to influence her. It further said that the matter warranted consideration by the court dealing with criminal contempt, directing that it be placed before the appropriate bench after seeking directions from the Chief Justice or the senior judge. Quoting the order, the court stated: "In view of the above, this Court prima facie finds that the matter requires indulgence by the Court dealing with criminal contempt matters. Let the matter be placed before the appropriate Court dealing with the contempt matters after seeking directions from Hon’ble the Chief Justice/Hon’ble the Senior Judge."
The underlying land dispute
The controversy arises out of a regular suit pending since 1997 before the civil judge in Gonda, involving several parcels of "Nazul" land. The dispute was brought to the High Court through a transfer petition filed by Jyoti Vidya Mandir School against the Gonda Municipal Council, seeking to move the case outside Devipat division because, as per Hindustan Times, the school alleged state officials were abusing their position and exerting undue pressure on the court.
The High Court heard that the land in question is recorded in the name of the commissioner of Devipat division. According to the divisional commissioner’s version placed before the bench, as reported by The Times of India, the land was reserved for construction of an office building and other government purposes. The authorities alleged that a school building was constructed on the land, and the case has been pending for nearly three decades, currently at the evidence stage and subject to a status quo order.
The judge's report and transfer of the case
The controversy escalated after civil judge, as reported by The Times of India, revealed an alleged telephonic conversation with the divisional commissioner, concerning her leave and, according to the judge, a pending case before her. The judge later requested the district judge of Gonda on August 4 that the matter be transferred from her court. The district judge subsequently transferred the suit to another court, which, as reported, made the transfer application infructuous.
The High Court bench said it could not ignore the allegations surrounding the phone call, and emphasized that subordinate courts must be protected from pressure and presiding officers must be free to discharge their duties fearlessly. The court also observed that the language of the conversation gave a direct impression that the judge had been sought to be influenced, and expressed surprise as to how a party could contact the court by phone in connection with a pending case.
Conflicting versions
Civil society members, as reported by The Hindu, have demanded a high-level probe by the Uttar Pradesh government into the allegations. According to The Hindu, the Gonda civil judge alleged she received repeated phone calls on July 15 while on leave, from a number linked to the Devipatan Division Commissioner’s office, and that the caller – who she identified as the commissioner – asked pointed questions about how long she intended to stay on leave. The judge said the "phone calls and the tone used amounted to interference."
In her version, as reported by The Hindu, Ms. Nagpar claimed she had not tried to discuss the merits of the case and only sought to know when the judge would resume hearing. The High Court, however, observed that the pressure prima facie struck at the independence of the judiciary and obstructed the administration of justice.
Calls for action and precedent
The controversy deepened with civil society members, including activist Amitabh Thakur, demanding action against the officer. Thakur was quoted by The Hindu as saying he had sent a letter to the Chief Secretary demanding the transfer of Durga Shakti Nagar and an independent inquiry, besides clear protocols for officials contacting judicial officers over pending cases.
The High Court, in its order, also cited a Supreme Court decision that takes a serious view of threats or pressure against judges in judicial proceedings, as reported by The Times of India.
Perspectives
Judiciary – The Allahabad High Court viewed the alleged phone call and the pressure described by civil judge Shabina Khan as a direct attack on the independence of the judiciary and a hindrance to the administration of justice, warranting consideration under criminal contempt.
Accused official – Durga Shakti Nagar, the divisional commissioner, denied seeking to discuss the merits of the case, stating she only asked when the judge would resume work, echoing the limited scope of the phone call.
Civil society – Activist Amitabh Thakur and others demanded a high-level probe, transfer of the official, independent inquiry, and clear protocols for how officials may contact judges, reflecting concern over judicial independence and proper procedures.