Supreme Court expunges Punjab Haryana High Court's comments challenging its stay order

PTC News Desk: A Supreme Court bench led by Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud and four senior-most judges met for a special sitting to expunge remarks made by Punjab and Haryana High Court judge challenging the apex court's status at the top of the judicial hierarchy. 

The 5-judge Bench took suo motu notice and removed the "unwarranted" remarks in the High Court's statement criticising the Top Court's stay order.

A video of Justice Rajbir Sehrawat of the Punjab and Haryana High Court's statements in court went viral on social media, prompting India's Chief Justice to caution judges to exercise restraint and responsibility when making observations during court proceedings.

"We are pained by the observations made by the single judge of the Punjab and Haryana High Court. The observations are made in regard to an order passed by the Supreme Court," CJI DY Chandrachud stated as the proceedings began.

The bench comprised of Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justices Sanjiv Khanna, BR Gavai, Surya Kant and Hrishikesh Roy.

The bench also issued a warning to the High Court judge, stating that he should exercise greater caution in the future while dealing with Supreme Court and High Court division bench orders.

The bench observed, "Justice Rajbir Sehrawat has made observations in regard to the Supreme Court of India, which are a matter of grave concern...Judicial discipline in the context of the hierarchical nature of the judicial system is intended to preserve the dignity of all institutions whether at the level of District Court, or High Court or Supreme Court."

"The observations which were made in the order of the single judge were unnecessary for the ultimate order which was passed. Gratuitous observations in regard to the previous orders passed by the Supreme Court are absolutely unwarranted. Compliance with the orders passed by the Supreme Court is not a matter of choice but a matter of bounden constitutional obligation. Parties may be aggrieved by an order. Judges are never aggrieved by an order passed by a higher constitutional forum," it added.

"Such observations tend to bring the entire judicial machinery into disrepute. This affects not only the dignity of this Court but also the High Court," the SC said in its order.

Though the bench agreed that the Attorney General and Solicitor General's assertions that the observations bordered on contempt were valid, the bench stated that they were inclined to exercise a degree of restraint in pursuing a further cause of action.

The bench observed that a division bench of the High Court had already taken suo motu notice of Justice Sehrawat's ruling and stayed it. However, because the observations tend to undermine the Supreme Court's authority, the bench ordered their expungement.