"Not Serious": Bombay High Court criticizes Judicial Magistrate for delay in dowry case trial

The Bombay High Court recently took strong exception to a Judicial Magistrate's failure to comply with the High Court's direction to speed up the trial in a dowry harassment case [Chandragupt Rambadan Chauhan v. State of Maharashtra].A Bench of Justice AS Gadkari and Justice Neela Gokhale said that it appeared that the concerned Magistrate was not serious in performing her judicial work and the Bench cannot accept the 'feeble excuses' given by her for not comply with the High Court's order."We are unable to accept the feeble excuses given by the learned Judicial Officer in not complying with the directions issued vide Order dated 24th February 2021 and paying scant respect to it. It appears to us that the Judicial Officer concerned, is not serious in performing her judicial work. This requires attention by the administrative committee of this Court," the Bench said in its order of August 9.Hence, it called for action by administrative committee of the High Court against the Magistrate. .The order was passed after the Magistrate submitted a report on July 31 detailing the delays in the trial process. She cited heavy backlog of older cases and staff shortages as reasons for the delays. However, the High Court found these explanations unconvincing, emphasizing that the magistrate has the authority to take necessary steps to expedite cases, regardless of the challenges..The High Court expressed concern about the Magistrate’s apparent lack of seriousness in handling her judicial responsibilities. The Bench rejected her request for additional six months to conclude the trial. The Court said that such a request reflected poorly on the court's functioning.Hence, it directed the registrar of the High Court to forward the report submitted by the Judicial Magistrate to the administrative committee of the High Court for further action against the Magistrate.The High Court will revisit the matter after the administrative committee addresses the report..Advocate Prashant Badole appeared for the applicant, one Chandragupt Rambadan Chauhan.Additional Public Prosecutor Vinod Chate appeared for the State.[Read Order]