1

Notes Submitted by Audhinarayana Vavili, Addl. Junior Civil

Judge, Kadiri for workshop on 26-9-2015 on “Canons of Judicial

Ethics, conduct, Character and Integrity of a Judicial Officer”.

******

Abstract: The greatest strength of the judiciary is the faith of the

people in it. Faith, confidence and acceptability cannot be

commanded; they have to be earned. And that can be done only by

developing the inner strength of morality and ethics. This note

contains the meaning and scope of Judicial ethics, conduct, character

and Integrity of a judicial officer and various instruments wherein a

judicial officer is obligated in complying the same without any

deviation from the standards set out therein. Further it is also

discussed with authorities of Hon‟ble Supreme Court from time to

time with regarding the ethos mandated by virtue of office of judicial

officer. This note insists the need of judicial accountability and finally

concludes with an observation that presses for independence of

judiciary with check and balances within its system.

Introduction:

Meaning of Canons:

Canons are the first verse of the first chapter of a book whose pages

are infinite. Observance of Canons of Judicial Ethics enables the judiciary to

struggle with confidence; to chasten oneself and be wise and to learn by

themselves the true values of judicial life. The discharge of judicial function

is an act of divinity. Perfection in performance of judicial functions is not

achieved solely by logic or reason. There is a mystic power which drives

the Earth and the Sun, every breeze on a flower and every smile on a child

and every breath which we take. It is this endurance and consciousness

which enables the participation of the infinite forces which command us in

our thought and action, which, expressed in simple terms and concisely

put, is called the „Canons of Judicial Ethics‟1.

1 Hon’ble Shri R.C. Lahoti, Former Chief Justice of India at lecture on Canons of Judicial Ethics dated 22nd

February, 2005 at pp 12.

2

Cannons Vs Principles

'Principles' are fundamental truth, the axioms, the code of right

conduct. Much of these remain confined to theory or hidden in books.

Canons are the type or the rules perfected by the principles put to practice.

Principles may be a faculty of the mind, a source of action which are a

pleasure to preach or read. 'Canons' are principles put into practice so as to

be recognized as rules of conduct commanding acceptability akin to

religion or firm faith, the departure wherefrom would be not a pardonable

mistake but an unpardonable sin.

Meaning of Ethics:

Morality or ethics is the science of conduct. Ethics is the study of

what is right or good in conduct. Ethical science shows the way in which

human beings should behave towards one another, as well as towards

other creatures. It contains systematized principles on which a man should

act. Ethics is right conduct or Sadachara. Ethics and morality cannot be

founded on authority thrust upon from outside. They are the matters of

conscience which sprout from within.

Judicial Ethics:

Canons of judicial ethics have been attempted, time and again, to be

drafted as a Code. Several documents of authority and authenticity are

available as drafted or crafted by several fora at the national and

international level. The fact remains that such a code is difficult to be

framed and certainly cannot be consigned to a straitjacket. Mostly these

canons have originated in and have been handed down by generation after

generation of judges by tradition and conventions.

Socrates advocated judges to hear courteously, answer wisely,

consider soberly and decide impartially. Alexander Hamilton once said

___ "The judiciary . . . has no influence over either the sword or the purse;

no direction either of the strength or of the wealth of the society, and can

take no active resolution whatever. It may truly be said to have neither

Force nor Will but merely judgment? ".

Justice J.B. Thomas of Australia said as2

2 [Judicial Ethics in Australia, 2d ed. Sydney: LBC Information Services,

1997]

3

“Some standards can be prescribed by law, but the spirit of, and the quality

of the service rendered by; a profession depends far more on its observance

of ethical standards. These are far more rigorous than legal standards....

They are learnt not by precept but by the example and influence of

respected peers. Judicial standards are acquired, so to speak, by

professional osmosis. They are enforced immediately by conscience.”

They are three important documents which mandates the ethic of

judges in the all levels right from Supreme Court to Sub-ordinate Courts.

They are:

(i) Restatement of Values of Judicial Life adopted by the Chief Justices'

Conference of India, 1999

(ii) The Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct, 2002

(iii) The Oath of a Judge at the time of taking over the judicial offices.

(i) Restatement of Values of Judicial Life adopted by the Chief Justices'

Conference of India, 1999

Restatement of Values of Judicial Life (1999) On May 7, 1997, the

Supreme Court of India in its Full Court adopted a Charter called the "

Restatement of Values of Judicial Life" to serve as a guide to be observed

by Judges, essential for independent, strong and respected judiciary,

indispensable in the impartial administration of justice. This Resolution

was preceded by a draft statement circulated to all the High Courts of the

country and suitably redrafted in the light of the suggestions received. It

has been described as the 'restatement of the preexisting and universally

accepted norms, guidelines and conventions' observed by Judges. It is a

complete code of the canons of judicial ethics. It reads as under:

(1) Justice must not merely be done but it must also be seen to be done. The

behavior and conduct of members of the higher judiciary must reaffirm

the people' s faith in the impartiality of the judiciary. Accordingly, any

act of a Judge of the Supreme Court or a High Court, whether in official

or personal capacity, which erodes the credibility of this perception, has

to be avoided.

4

(2) A Judge should not contest the election to any office of a Club, society

or other association; further he shall not hold such elective office except

in a society or association connected with the law.

(3) Close association with individual members of the Bar, particularly

those who practice in the same court, shall be eschewed.

(4) A Judge should not permit any member of his immediate family, such

as spouse, son, daughter, son-in-law or daughter15 in-law or any other

close relative, if a member of the Bar, to appear before him or even be

associated in any manner with a cause to be dealt with by him.

(5) No member of his family, who is a member of the Bar, shall be

permitted to use the residence in which the Judge actually resides or

other facilities for professional work.

(6) A Judge should practice a degree of aloofness consistent with the

dignity of his office.

(7) A Judge shall not hear and decide a matter in which a member of his

family, a close relation or a friend is concerned.

(8) A Judge shall not enter into public debate or express his views in public

on political matters or on matters that are pending or are likely to

arise for judicial determination.

(9) A Judge is expected to let his judgments speak for themselves. He shall

not give interviews to the media.

(10) A Judge shall not accept gifts or hospitality except from his family,

close relations and friends.

(11) A Judge shall not hear and decide a matter in which a company in

which he holds shares is concerned unless he has disclosed his

interest and no objection to his hearing and deciding the matter is

raised.

(12) A Judge shall not speculate in shares, stocks or the like.

(13) A Judge should not engage directly or indirectly in trade or business,

either by himself or in association with any other person. (Publication

of a legal treatise or any activity in the nature of a hobby shall not be

construed as trade or business).

5

(14) A Judge should not ask for, accept contributions or otherwise actively

associate himself with the raising of any fund for any purpose.

(15) A Judge should not seek any financial benefit in the form of a

perquisite or privilege attached to his office unless it is clearly

available. Any doubt in this behalf must be got resolved and clarified

through the Chief Justice.

(16) Every Judge must at all times be conscious that he is under the public

gaze and there should be no act or omission by him which is

unbecoming of the high office he occupies and the public esteem in

which that office is held.

These are only the "Restatement of the Values of Judicial Life" and

are not meant to be exhaustive but illustrative of what is expected of a

Judge. The above "restatement" was ratified and adopted by Indian

Judiciary in the Chief Justices' Conference 1999. All the High Courts in the

country have also adopted the same in their respective Full Court Meetings

(ii) The Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct, 2002.

The Bangalore Draft Principles The values of judicial ethics which the

Bangalore Principles crystallises are : (i) independence (ii) impartiality , (iii)

integrity, (iv) propriety (v) equality and (vi) competence & diligence.

(iii) The Oath of a Judge at the time of taking over the judicial offices:

The oath taken by the Judges at the time of taking over the judicial

offices reminds them of their responsibilities and sums up the subject at

hand truly, fully and effectually. It obliges them to be faithful to the

Constitution of India. They undertake that they shall uphold the

sovereignty & integrity of India and to truly and faithfully perform the

duties of their offices without fear or favour, affection or ill-will and in

doing so shall render judgment to the best of their ability and knowledge.

This in a way summarizes the code of ethics for those holding judicial

offices.

Meaning of Conduct and Character:

People would refer to words character, conduct, nature or disposition

and reputation of a person. It is said that “character‟ is what you are and

“conduct” is what other see. As Lord denning observed „ A Man‟s

character, it is sometimes said, is what he in fact is, where as his reputation

is what others think he is.” Thus, nature and disposition is what you are

6

and reputation is what others think of you. In other words, character and

nature are inherent and internal to a person and unseen by others, whereas

conduct is manifest3. It is therefore, conduct is external behavior and

character is the aggregate of peculiar qualities which constitute personal

individuality.

Integrity:

“Integrity according to Oxford dictionary is moral uprightness. The

word integrity depicts sterling character with firm adherence to a code of

moral values. „Judiciary is an integrity institution‟. Therefore, Judicial

Officers should possess the sterling quality of integrity. Integrity is the

hallmark of judicial discipline apart from others as reminded by the

Hon‟ble Apex Court in Tarak Singh vs. Jyoti Basu4, To quote:

“ Integrity is the hallmark of judicial discipline, apart from others. It

is high time the judiciary took utmost care to see that the temple of justice

does not crack from inside, which will lead to a catastrophe in the judicial-

delivery system resulting in the failure of public confidence in the system.

It must be remembered that woodpeckers inside pose a larger threat than

the storm outside.”

In High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan vs. Ramesh Chand

Paliwal5, Judges have been described as „hermits‟, further reminding that,

“they have to live and behave like hermits, who have no desire or

aspiration, having shed it through penance. Their mission is to supply light

and not heat”.

In High Court of Judicature at Bombay vs. Uday Singh6, in the

matter of maintenance of discipline, the Hon‟ble Apex Court stated as

follows:

………..“Maintenance of discipline in the judicial service is a paramount

matter. Acceptability of the judgment depends upon the credibility of the

conduct, honesty, integrity and character of the officer. The confidence of

the litigating public gets affected or shaken by lack of integrity and

character of Judicial Officer.”……

3 The Indian Evidence Act: A Critical Commentary Covering Emerging Issues and International Developments by Dr.

V Nageswara Rao, First Edition,2012 at page 334. 4 (2005)1 SCC 201

5 (1998) 2 SCC 72

6 (2000) 1 SCC 416

7

In Daya Shankar vs. High Court of Allahabad7, the Hon‟ble Supreme

Court set the following standard:

“Judicial officers cannot have two standards, one in the court and another

outside the court. They must have only one standard of rectitude, honesty

and integrity. They cannot act even remotely unworthy of the office they

occupy.”

Any power in absence of accountability would turn into a tyranny. It

is the cardinal pre-requisite of democracy and rule of law that power is

accompanied by accountability. Judges can be accountable only by

demonstrating exemplary conduct and behavior and showing a cultured

image. Some critics have accused judges to be prone to developing “a god

complex” George Mikes in his article “Professional Deformities” writes as

under:

“It was not that Judges were, or are, Sadists. Very few of them are.

But sooner or later most of them develop a „God complex.‟ When everyone

keeps kowtowing to you; when people laugh at your silliest jokes and

listen to your most, trivial utterances though they were the Sermons on the

Mount; when the outcome of quarrels and arguments, and often the fates

of men, and women and their children rest in your hands; when you

cannot be sacked from your job, however, incompetent or senile you

become ..… when, in other words you are treated like God, then it is

difficult not to believe in your own divinity. You are addressed as “My

Lord”, almost like Him, so naturally you are inclined to believe. He is your

colleague. ”

Concluding Remarks:

I conclude this note by reiterating the words of former Chief Justice

Hon‟ble Justice Y.V Sabharwar as under:

Much has been said about the need for a Code of Ethics for the

judiciary at various points of time. Question arises as to what is the

necessity of reiterating the principles which are known to all of us. I would

answer it this way. The principles may be known to us. But with all

democratic institutions facing the crisis of credibility in the fast changing

socio-economic norms, there is always a need to keep reminding ourselves

of the Code of Conduct the judiciary is expected to follow. These

principles, if reiterated time and again, would hopefully get ingrained in

7 (1987) 3 SCC 1.

8

the minds of young judges so that what is expected of them becomes their

second nature. The reiteration is also required so that the public at large, in

general, and the legal fraternity, in particular, are also wary and do not

allow, or lead, those on the Bench into going astray8.

8Lecture by Hon’ble Justice Y.V Sabharwar, Former Chief Justice of Inida on Canons of Judicial Ethics.

1

JUDICIAL ETHICS

1. After attaining independence, the people of India adopted and chose

for themselves a democratic form of Government. Like any other modern

democratic polity, the system in our country is also divided into three

organs, viz. Legislature, Executive and Judiciary. The Constitution divides

the powers amongst these three organs and makes them independent of

each other, yet creating a system of checks and balances. The role assigned

to the judiciary is of utmost importance. This organ is vested with the duty

to uphold the Constitution and guarantee that the rule of law envisaged in

our Constitution will always prevail. In order to ensure that the judiciary is

able to discharge this onerous responsibility, the concept of independence of

the judiciary was planted into the Constitution as one of its basic structures,

tinkering with which is taboo.

2. The concept of independence of Judiciary was the cause of concern of

the Supreme Court in the case of S.P. Gupta Vs. Union of India [1981

(Suppl.) SCC 87], and the Court observed thus: “The concept of

independence of the judiciary is a noble concept which inspires the

constitutional scheme and constitutes the foundation on which rests the

edifice of our democratic polity. If there is one principle which runs through

the entire fabric of the Constitution, it is the principle of the Rule of Law and

under the Constitution, it is the judiciary which is entrusted with the task of

keeping every organ of the State within the limits of the law and thereby

making the Rule of Law meaningful and effective. It is to aid the judiciary in

this task that the power of judicial review has been conferred upon the

judiciary and it is by exercising this power which constitutes one of the most

potent weapons in armory of the law, that the judiciary seeks to protect the

citizen against violation of his constitutional or legal rights or misuse or

abuse of power by the State or its officers.” The Judges thus are a privileged

class and vested with duties of great responsibility, holding offices of public

trust. It has been often said that the duty of a Judge is a divine duty. The

concept of rule of law is dependent on an independent, fair and competent

judiciary since Judges are, to borrow words from the Preamble of Model

Code of Judicial Conduct adopted by American Bar Association in 1990

“arbiters of facts and law for the resolution of disputes and a highly

visible symbol of Government under the rule of law”. When we talk of

ethics, we mean moral principles that have evolved to keep us on the path

2

of virtue or, to put it simply, morally correct. When we use the word

“canon”, it refers to principles of morality that are regarded as very lofty.

3. Almost every public servant is governed by certain basic Code of

Conduct which includes expectation that he shall maintain absolute integrity;

devotion to duty; do nothing which is unbecoming of a public office held by

him; render his best judgment in the performance of his official duties; be

prompt and courteous; not involve himself in acts of moral turpitude; not

take part in party politics; not be associated with activities that are pre-

judicial to the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India or public

order; not to engage himself in interviews with media, except with the lawful

authority of his superiors; not divulge official information which has been

entrusted to him in confidence; not accept pecuniary advantage, in

particular, from those with whom he is involved in official duties; not to

engage himself in private trade or business while holding public office; not to

indulge in alcoholism or gambling; to manage his financial affairs in such a

manner that he is always free from indebtedness and not to involve himself

in transactions relating to property with persons having official dealings with

him. But then, these are general principles governing the Code of Conduct

for all public servants. The office of a Judge requires much more. The Code

of Ethics expected of those in the judiciary goes beyond the call of duty of an

ordinary public servant.

4. Much has been said down the ages about the code of ethics for the

judiciary. In more recent times, Indian judiciary ratified and adopted a

charter called “Re-statement of Values of Judicial Life” in the Chief Justices’

Conference in 1999. At the International level, Principles of Judicial Conduct

were approved and adopted in November 2002 in the Round-Table Meeting

of the Chief Justices from several law systems held in Peace Palace in

Hague, Netherlands. I do not intend this to be a compendium of all rules of

ethics for judges. I would be highlighting only those, which to my mind are

of prime importance. The people of India look up to the judiciary to

administer justice; justice that is fair; justice that is equal & even-handed;

and justice that is unpolluted. This expectation is of eternal value. The

principles of ethics that is the conduct of an ideal Judge arise out of what is

a legitimate well-entrenched right of the people for whom the judicial

institution has been created. It is the right of the people of India that the

courts will give them their due in the form of justice. The rules of ethics are

3

nothing but a corresponding sacred duty on the part of the Judges to live up

to those expectations. There are certain cardinal principles of judicial ethics

that apply to any person holding a judicial office whether at the level of

subordinate judiciary or in the highest court of the land. I would broadly

categorize these principles into three: one, concerning the acts attributable

to his official functions as a Judge; second, concerning his conduct while in

public glare; and third, the expectations of him during his private life.

Necessarily, most of these principles will overlap the three spheres of life of

a Judge.

5. The oath taken by the Judges at the time of taking over the judicial

offices reminds them of their responsibilities and sums up the subject at

hand truly, fully and effectually. It obliges them to be faithful to the

Constitution of India. They undertake that they shall uphold the

sovereignty & integrity of India and to truly and faithfully perform the

duties of their offices without fear or favour, affection or ill-will and in

doing so shall render judgment to the best of their ability and knowledge.

This in a way summarizes the code of ethics for those holding judicial offices.

The oath to uphold and be faithful to the Constitution binds the Judge to the

ethos and philosophy enshrined in the Constitution, the supreme law of the

land. Since the concept of equality before the law is one of the salient

features of the Constitution, it naturally implies that a Judge is expected to

always be fair and impartial in his judgment. It is an age-old adage, oft-

quoted in legal circles, that ”Justice is not only to be done but must be seen

to have been done”. The obligations arising from the above principle are

myriad. The Judge must be even-handed. His approach must be

consistent, irrespective of the fact as to who is before him in the dock. He

is to sit with open mind. This also means that he cannot act on pre-

conceived notions. He may have his own independent views and approach to

a given subject. But, in his judgment there can be no room for personal

idiosyncrasies. He is in the judgment seat in a fiduciary character. He has

to apply law as has been established and evolved. He can give a definite

direction to the law by adding his views to the debate on a particular issue,

keeping himself within the four corners of judicial propriety. His personal

whims or caprice can have no role to play in the discharge of his official

duties. It is his duty to apply the law as it exists rather than develop the law

anew every time a new person appears before him. There are certain well-

4

entrenched rules founded on principles of public policy which reflect as to

what is expected in the conduct of a Judge. These rules include the

following: -

i) Regard for the public welfare is the highest law (SALUS POPULI EST

SUPREMA LEX).

ii) No man shall be condemned unheard (AUDI ALTERAM PARTEM).

iii) No man can be judge in his own cause (NEMO DEBET ESSE JUDEX IN

PROPRIA SUA CAUSA).

iv) An act of the Court shall prejudice no man (ACTUS CURIAE NEMINEM

GRAVABIT).

6. These principles are fundamental rules in the administration of justice

and are based on rules of good sense and fair play. Some of these are

clubbed together to be categorized as rules of natural justice. A Judge

administers justice. In order to do justice, the first and foremost expectation

of him is to be just. In my view, this expectation itself is the fountain source

of all that can be put in the realm of canons of judicial ethics. His life must

be one open to probity. As a person, in order to be just, has to be morally

right, a Judge has also to be fair & impartial to all concerned. He cannot

have any pre-disposed state of mind. It is wrong to say that a person has

the power to be a Judge. It is rather his duty to judge and, seen in this light,

it is expected that his judgment would not be actuated by concerns of

private interests or considerations. He must hold the scales of justice evenly.

He has to be exact. He has to be merciful. He has to be decisive. He has

to be upright and resolute.

7. The above straight away takes us to the concerns about consistency.

A fair Judge will always be consistent in his approach to the appreciation of

facts and application of law to the facts found proved before him.

Inconsistencies in the judgment of an individual bring bad name to the

institution. They invite criticisms worded such as “Show me the face and I

will show you the law”. A Judge will always execute the duties of his office

diligently & faithfully. This broad proposition can be further divided into

several sub-mores. The notions of fairness and impartiality give rise to

certain special norms for Judges. These norms are designed so that he

remains independent and uninfluenced. His job is to hear the parties in the

open court. It is thus taboo for him to give a private audience to the

litigants or their lawyers. He has to shun social interactions with such

5

category of persons at all costs. The concept of courts functioning under the

public glare generally called “open court” is not an idle one. It is based on

the principle of transparency because that reinforces faith and confidence

of the public in the system. It is, therefore, a sacred duty of every Judge to

function in the open in discharge of his official duties. The judicial

procedure and practice are regulated by pre-set rules and norms. It is true

that procedural law is hand-maid of justice. But, at the same time, it is also

true that procedural law has been evolved on the basis of experience of last

several centuries. Each step of the procedure prescribed by the law has a

definite purpose and philosophy behind it. In order to do complete justice,

sometimes the Judge may have to shed the straitjacket of the procedure but

this cannot become a norm. Compliance with the procedure established

by law ensures that the litigants remain aware of the progress of the case in

the Court and would not be taken by surprise at any step of the way. The

judicial system in India faces the challenge of huge arrears. The figures of

pendency at all levels are staggering. It may sound clichéd to say that

“delayed justice” is “denied justice”. But, every litigant legitimately expects

quick justice. With the courts crushed under the weight of sheer numbers, it

is not easy to render quick justice. Need to expedite the wheels of justice in

each case continues to be of great relevance and importance. In order to

meet the lawful expectations of the people at large, it is imperative that

each Judge must be in full control & command of his court. This brings us

to another area of judicial ethics.

8. A Judge cannot be in command of his court unless he is fully

committed to the task assigned to him. It is expected from him that he

would not adopt the mentality of a menial clerk who works for certain fixed

hours of the day to earn his living. The office of Judge is not a service or

employment in the ordinary sense of the term. It is an office of public

service. A Judge remains a Judge hours a day, 7 days a week and 365 days

a year. He thinks about the cases on board even while he is asleep. In order

to show such commitment, a Judge must first cherish the solemn duty

he has undertaken. It naturally flows from the above that the Judge must

be studious, thorough, prepared and well conversant with the factual

or legal nuances of the litigation he is handling. This requires preparation

before the hearing so that the hearing is properly controlled. This also

requires calm & dispassionate disposition & study after the hearing. A

6

Judge who is alive to the contours of the case before him would never

permit unending cross-examination or infinite arguments. He would

always be in charge and full command of the proceedings in the Court and

keep the counsel on either side focused on the issues to be addressed. This

achieves several positive results. A Judge answering to these traits will have

a Cause List that utilizes his judicial time to the optimum. Such a Judge

would not like to sit idle and, therefore, shall ensure that he has requisite

number of cases lined up before him so as to remain pre-occupied

throughout the normal working hours. Speaking in the context of trial

Judges, a conscious Judge would always ensure that only relevant and

crucial witnesses in such number are called on each working day before him

as can be examined and thereafter discharged without being burdened with

the obligation to be called again and again. He would studiously protect

harassment of the litigants in general and witnesses in particular, by

unscrupulous elements. His proceedings will always ensure that the

procedure is strictly followed and each case makes the requisite progress, at

least to the extent of the step for which it was listed on any given date. All

this care & caution shown by a vigilant Judge would not only underscore

that he is a resolute man firmly in control, earning him good respect and

reputation in the public and the Bar but also facilitate expeditious

disposal of cases in his Court.

9. It naturally flows from the above that a Judge can never be

unjustifiably absent from duty. He has to be available & accessible to

the people at large who are expected to invoke his jurisdiction for redressal

of their grievances. In nutshell, a Judge has to be punctual & regular in

adhering to the court hours. The need for punctuality and regularity is not

only to have full control over the work but also to have a moral authority to

check indiscipline amongst those who are expected to play a role in the

functioning of the Court, including the court staff, members of the Bar, the

litigants, witnesses etc. Conversely put, and as a natural corollary, he would

not abdicate his duties or unconscionably refuse to use his jurisdiction to

do justice.

10. A Judge cannot create discipline in his Court unless he leads by

example. In this view, restraint and discipline are most important

attributes of an ideal Judge. Such a Judge would maintain dignity and

decorum in his Court; would not indulge in loose talk; would refrain from

7

unnecessary utterances and would keep his temper in check. Since he

would not himself indulge in intemperate language, he would not allow

anyone else to do so. It naturally inheres in this trait that such a Judge

would always be polite & considerate and imbued with a sense of

humility. He would not disturb the submissions of the lawyers midway only

to project a “know-all” image for himself. This also means that he would be

sitting with an open mind, eager to be advised by the counsel of the parties.

Any power in absence of accountability would turn into a tyranny. It is the

cardinal pre-requisite of democracy and rule of law that power is

accompanied by accountability. Judges can be accountable only by

demonstrating exemplary conduct and behaviour and showing a cultured

image. It is necessary, and it is my firm view, that judges must remain

humane and considerate. They have been vested with divine duties but

they would never attain divinity. They are mere agents of the superior power

that controls us to do justice between man and man. They have to bear in

mind the maxim “Do not do unto others what you would not have others do

unto you”. A humane Judge will always be just and merciful. He would

always remember that “mercy seasons justice”.

11. A just and humane Judge will always be non-partisan. He

would be above narrow considerations and not prone to external

influences. His judgment would be dispassionate. He would not identify

with the cause of a particular section of society. It naturally follows from this

that a Judge would always be aboveboard and demonstrate absolute

integrity not only in his Court but also in his private life outside the Court.

He would refrain from socializing unnecessarily not only with the persons

having official work in his Court but also generally with the society at large,

since there is no guarantee as to who could have a case coming in his Court

in the future. If his commitment to the job is sincere, he would virtually be

left with no time for social life beyond a point. A Judge need not be unsocial

as his personal life would involve his near and dear ones. Yet, he is expected

to be asocial, since his movement in any particular section of the society

might give rise to reasonable apprehensions in the minds of the litigants

about his independence. I now come to a touchy subject. The tendency to

invite judges for different seminars has increased over the last few years. If

the intentions were purely academic, this should be a welcome trend. But,

unfortunately the tribe of certain sections organizing seminars only to create

8

a pretext to invite certain judges for a small session of lectures or

discussions, followed by lavish hospitality, gives rise to anxiety as to

whether the motives were holy or otherwise. Personally speaking, I have

nothing against judges participating in academic seminars, workshops etc.

But this cannot become a regular routine. Judges cannot afford to make

themselves so accessible that they loose the aura of authority around them.

The position in the office of a Judge puts him on a high pedestal in the

temple of justice. Too much familiarity with those who frequently visit their

courts on official business slackens the authority and has the possibility of

breeding contempt.

12. Further, speaking from public platforms, may be on legal issues,

generates the possibility that the judges might end up publicly discussing

cases pending before them. This would not be healthy. This would create an

impression in the mind of the litigants involved in such a case that the Judge

is sitting with a pre-disposed mind. Even further, the issues of law that are

generally debated in the workshops, seminars or conferences are closely

interlinked with the political issues of the day. A Judge, in order to be

impartial, has to be apolitical. In his personal life, he may have certain

leanings towards a particular political philosophy. But those leanings cannot

reflect in his official exertion. A Judge must never get himself bracketed with

a particular political philosophy.

13. The concept of “due application of mind” involves a mental disposition

where the Judge is not only open to listen, comprehend and weigh in

balance the arguments advanced before him but is also open to

correction. Judges are also human beings, prone to frailties as any other

human would be. They also sometimes err. It is their bounden duty to be

always eager to review, if allowed in law, so that they could undo injustice, if

any, done at their hand or at least revise their view so that same mistake

would not recur; this, because repetition of error would be suspect as

intentional or motivated and therefore, unpardonable.

14. I talked of external influences. Every Judge in the course of his career

is subjected to tests by external influences. They could be in the form of

pressure tactics, threats, allurement etc. It is the times when such external

influences come into play that the true strength of the character of the

Judge comes to the fore. The duties of the Judge render him a person in

public service. He is thus a public property. There cannot, therefore, be

9

anything about his life which should remain hidden from public glare. His life

must be an open book. It flows from this that the assets and liabilities of

the Judge are known to one and all.

15. His financial or property transactions should have no nexus with

his official dealings. He must declare the same scrupulously and at no cost

should engage himself with anyone connected with his official duties.

Judges also deal with public money in the management of the Court. All

transactions involving public money by the Judges must necessarily be

strictly adhering to the financial rules so that he can be accountable. Any

deviation from the norms invites criticism putting a question mark on his

credibility and integrity which a Judge, in the larger interest of the public

confidence, can ill-afford.

16. Coming to the allurements, a Judge must train himself in the

beginning of his judicial career not to fall prey to offers of valuable gifts in

cash, kind or service from members of the general public. Hon’ble Mr.

Justice Krishna Iyer in his book “Law and the People” went to the extent of

observing thus:

“It must be said that the independence of judiciary which plays the

useful role in democratic societies in checking a class biased

Government is being undermined in our country, by such devices as

making judges, after retirement or on the eve of retirement,

governors, ambassadors, vice chancellors etc. These plums have a

seductive influence on superannuating gentlemen and should be

avoided, if we are purists regarding the independence of the

judiciary.”

17. A judge cannot afford to be accused of acts of moral turpitude. He

cannot indulge, in or outside his court, in such behavior as can create doubts

about the credibility of his character. His behavior has to be a model one.

Only then he would be able to command respect. Like it has been said:

“Caesar’s wife has also to be above suspicion”. The duty to remain within the

bounds of morality is not restricted to the Judge himself. He is to see to it

that members of his family, at least those who live with him also subscribe

to this philosophy. A scandalous behavior on the part of a Judge, even in his

private affairs, is bound to affect his image and prestige in the office of the

Judge.

(B.DEVENDRA REDDY)

Junior Civil Judge,

Madakasira,

Anantapuramu District.

NOTES ON

"CANNONS OF JUDICIAL ETHICS, CONDUCT,CHARACTER AND

INTEGRITY OF A JUDICIAL OFFICER”

Submitted by

Y.Nagaraja,

Junior Civil Judge,

Kalyandurg.

Indian Constitution is based on Rule of Law and the system of parliamentary

democracy. The essential requisite of political system is based on Rule of Law and

there should be Impartial Judiciary i.e. an independent body must be there to

decide whether the rule of law is being observed or not. That independent body is

the judiciary. Judicial officers perform duties without fear or favour; affection or ill-

will, in short judge must decide impartially. In order to render justice impartially

there should be certain principles for the judicial officer i.e. Judicial Ethics,

Conduct, Character and Integrity.

To perform duties impartially by a judicial officer must have “5-C's

and 4-P's”

i.Courtesy :- Patience, dignity and courtesy are essential attributes in court and

in chambers, a judge should always act courteously and respect the dignity of all

who have business there. A judge should also require similar courtesy from those

who appear before him or her, and from court staff and others subject to the

judge’s direction or control. Judge has to be courteous towards advocates who

appeared before court, be Polite with advocates while getting clarifications from

them, shall not force the advocates to give reply. A judge must not make improper

and insulting remarks about litigants, advocates.

//2//

ii. Character :- A judge should be above personal animosities, and must not

have favourites at the Bar. Unjustified reprimands of counsel, offensive remarks

about litigants or witnesses and intemperate behaviour by a judge undermines both

order and decorum in the court. When a judge intervenes, he or she should ensure

that impartiality, and the perception of impartiality, are not adversely affected by

the manner of the intervention. A judge has practice of aloofness, should not

accept costly Gifts and Hospitality from others.

iii.Commitment:- Dedicatation towards duties

iv.Courge :- The confidence to act according to law and rendering justice without

fear.

v. Conviction:- Firmly held belief or opinion

4-P's

i.Punctuality:- Adhering to Judicial time

ii.Probity:- Moral integrity and honesty, The inappropriate use of court

staff is an abuse of judicial authority that places the

employee in an extremely difficult situation. Court staff

should not be directed to perform inappropriate and

excessive personal services for a judge beyond minor matters

iii. Promptness:- Judgments should be delivered within time. Justice delayed

justice denied. If fails to deliver judgment intime it amounts

to great misconduct.

iv.Patience :- Anger management , be patient but not be too patience.

//3//

As per SUKRANEETHI:- A judge should be beyond

“Raga, Dwesha,Lobha and Bhyaya”

Raga: Favourisim to party

Dwesha: Doing unfavourism to hartred or haten party

Lobha: Greed, Which is root cause for all evils in the world.

It is mother of all evils.

Bhaya: Afraid, it is a great weakness of a person.

DECISIONS ON JUDICIAL ETHICS, CONDUCT,CHARACTER AND

INTEGRITY OF A JUDICIAL OFFICER

“JUDICIAL OFFICER CAN NOT HAVE TWO STANDARDS”

HELD in case of DAYA SHANKAR V/S HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD, Reported in AIR 1987 SC 1469 “Judicial Officers cannot have two standards, one in the Court and another outside the Court.

They must have only one standard of rectitude and integrity. They cannot act even remotely

unworthy of the office they occupy.”

“Self intraspection”

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY V/S SHIRISH KUMAR

RANGRAO PATIL Reported in 1997(6)SCC 339

“....The lymph-nodes (cancerous cells) of corruption constantly keep creeping into the

vital veins of judiciary and the need to stem it out by judicial surgery lies on judiciary

itself by its self-imposed or corrective measures or disciplinary action under the doctrine

of control enshrined in Articles 235, 124(6) of the Constitution...”

//4//

Bangalore Principles of Judcial Ethics,2002

The Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct are a comprehensive statement of ethical

principles. By resolution 2006/23, the United Nations Economic and Social Council emphasized

that the Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct “represent a further development and are

complementary to the Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary”, and invited

Member States, “consistent with their domestic legal systems, to encourage their judiciaries to

take into account the Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct when reviewing or developing

rules with respect to the professional and ethical conduct of members of the judiciary”.

WHEREAS the Universal Declaration of Human Rights recognizes as fundamental the principle

that everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and

impartial tribunal, in the determination of rights and obligations and of any criminal charge.

WHEREAS the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights guarantees that all persons

shall be equal before the courts, and that in the determination of any criminal charge or of rights

and obligations in a suit at law, everyone shall be entitled, without undue delay, to a fair and

public hearing by a competent, independent and impartial tribunal established by law.

WHEREAS the foregoing fundamental principles and rights are also recognized or reflected in

regional human rights instruments, in domestic constitutional, statutory and common law, and in

judicial conventions and traditions.

WHEREAS the importance of a competent, independent and impartial judiciary to the protection

of human rights is given emphasis by the fact that the implementation of all the other rights

ultimately depends upon the proper administration of justice.

//5//

WHEREAS a competent, independent and impartial judiciary is likewise essential if the courts

are to fulfil their role in upholding constitutionalism and the rule of law.

WHEREAS public confidence in the judicial system and in the moral authority and integrity of

the judiciary is of the utmost importance in a modern democratic society.

WHEREAS it is essential that judges, individually and collectively, respect and honour judicial

office as a public trust and strive to enhance and maintain confidence in the judicial system.

WHEREAS the primary responsibility for the promotion and maintenance of high standards of

judicial conduct lies with the judiciary in each country.

AND WHEREAS the United Nations Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary are

designed to secure and promote the independence of the judiciary, and are addressed primarily

to States.

LEGAL PROVISIONS ON JUDICIAL ETHICS, CONDUCT,CHARACTER

AND INTEGRITY OF A JUDICIAL OFFICER:-

As per Article 39A of Indian constitution :-

The State shall secure that the operation of the legal system promotes justice, on a basis

of equal opportunity, and shall, in particular, provide free legal aid, by suitable legislation or

schemes or in any other way, to ensure that opportunities for securing justice are not denied to

any citizen by reason of economic or other disabilities.

A.P.SERVICES CONDUCT SERVICE RULES 1964: applies for all Government

Servants including Judicial Officers:

As per Rule 3(1) :- Every Government employee shall be devoted to his duty and

shall maintain absolute integrity, discipline, impartiality and a sense of propriety.

//6//

As Per Rule 3(2):-No Government employee shall behave in a manner which is

unbecoming of such employee or derogatory to the prestige of Government.

Section 27 of A.P.CIVIL Courts Act: No Judicial Officer shall try suit if he is

interested or tried:

Section 27 Judicial officers not to try suits in which they are interested nor to try

appeals from decrees or orders passed by them in other capacities

(1) No judicial officer shall try any suit to which he is a party or in which he is

personally interested, nor he shall adjudicate upon any proceeding connected with,

or arising out of, such suit.

(2) No such officer shall try any appeal against a judgment, decree or order passed

by him in another capacity.

(3) Where any such suit, proceeding or appeal comes before any such officer, he

shall report the circumstances to the court to which he is immediately subordinate.

(4) The superior court shall thereupon dispose of the case in the manner provided

by Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908.

(5) Nothing in sub-section (4) shall be deemed to affect the extraordinary original

civil Jurisdiction of the High Court.

Explanation :- In this section the expression 'Judicial Officer', includes any Judge

of the City Civil Court, any District Judge, any Senior Civil Judge and any Junior

Civil Judge .

//7//

Section 479 Cr.P.C :

479.Case in which Judge or Magistrate is personally interested.

No Judge or Magistrate shall, except with the permission of the Court to which an

appeal lies from his Court, try or commit for trial any case to or in which he is a

party, or personally interested, and no Judge or Magistrate shall hear an appeal

from any judgment or order passed or made by himself.

Explanation.-A Judge or Magistrate shall not be deemed to be a party to, or

personally interested in, any case by reason only that he is concerned therein in a

public capacity, or by reason only that he has viewed the place in which an offence

is alleged to have been committed or any

Section 352 Cr.P.C :

352. Certain Judges and Magistrates not to try certain offences when committed

before themselves. Except as provided in sections 344, 345, 349 and 350, no

Judge of a Criminal Court (other than a Judge of a High Court) or Magistrate shall

try any person for any offence referred to in section 195, when such offence is

committed before himself or in contempt of his authority, or is brought under his

notice as such Judge or Magistrate in the course of a judicial proceeding.

Conclusion:- In my opinion Judicial officers must be free from “Raga,

Dwesha,Lobha and Bhyaya”.

From To

Sri.Y.Nagaraja, The Hon’ble Principal District Judge,

Junior Civil Judge, A n a n t a p u r a m u.

Kalyandurg.

Dis.No. Dated:-01/09/2015

Honoured Sir,

Sub:- Workshops – Workshops to be conducted once in three months

to the Judicial Officers Notes on the topic of “ Cannons of Judicial

Ethics , Conduct, Character and Integrity of a Judicial Officer”-

Submitted – Regarding.

Ref:- 1. Letter of the Hon’ble High Court in ROC.No.5-WS/2015-RR,

dated:- 15-7-2015

2. Circular of Hon'ble District Court, Anantapuramu in Dis.No.4794,

Dated:-24-7-2015

3. Circular of Hon’ble District Court , Anantapuramu in

Dis.No.5082/2015/Admn./Genl. Dated:-5-8-2015.

=O=

In obedience to the subject and reference cited I am herewith submitting the Notes

on the topic of “ Cannons of Judicial Ethics , Conduct, Character and Integrity of a Judicial Officer”

for kind consideration.

Yours faithfully,

Junior Civil Judge,

Kalyandurg.

1

JUDGMENT WRITING IN GENERAL

1. Judgment is the process by which decisions are made on a dispute by the

competent organs having the power to entertain the case. That is to say a court

or judicial institutions having a jurisdiction will be able to see the case and

finally to make rulings to the matter and this decision is called judgment.

2. Judgment does not include only the action of pronouncing or orally

passing of decision but also the recording or writing down of that judgment is

also included. Therefore, judgment has two basic parts the process of giving or

making the judgment and also the step of writing the judgment. So, the matter

of judgment explores the issues including the basic task of making and writing

judgment.

3. Judgment writing having its own general view and relation with the

process of making judgment it is a wide concept which encompasses different

kinds of steps and rules.

4. The term judgment is defined by different scholars almost invariably, but

with the slight deviation. Judgment, as provided in P.H Collins Law Dictionary, is

simply defined as” the official decision given by a court of law” emphasis being

given to the body making it.

5. The term judgment is broadly defined in the Black's Law Dictionary as

"the official and authentic decision of a court of justice upon the respective

rights and claims of the parties to an action or suit therein litigated and

submitted to its determination. It is the final decision of the court resolving the

dispute and determining the rights and obligations of the parties. It can also be

defined as a decision or sentence of the law given by court of justice or other

competent tribunal as a result of proceedings instituted therein".

6. As such, according to the above definition, it is a determination of a court

of competent jurisdiction upon matters submitted to it, deciding the respective

rights and duties of the parties involved in the dispute.

7. On the basis of the above definitions, it can be safely concluded that

judgment has the following basic features:-

a) It should be a decision given on the basis of the law and pronounced publicly

(officially). Here, it should be remembered that a mere decision of a judicial

organ , after appreciating the case , can not be termed as judgment unless it is

officially declared in front of the parties litigating to each other and possibly the

larger public (court audience.)

2

b) It should be given after the litigating parties submit their case for

determination at the disposal of the body giving judgment. Here a note needs to

be taken that the judicial body should make sure that it is provided with a case

in its hand in order to render a judgment. In other words, the judicial body (or

its members) can not make judgments based on their personal knowledge,

unless the dispute is brought before them by either of the parties to the conflict

for disposition.

c) Judgment should also be given by the competent tribunal to dispose the

particular case before hand. Hence, a decision made by a body which lacks the

required legal authority to adjudicate the case can not be regarded as

judgment. As a result there will be no room for such kind of decisions to be

enforced. In simpler terms, decision given by an incompetent body can not have

binding nature at all over the subjects of the decision.

d) It should contain a determination as to the respective rights and duties of the

disputing parties. By having so, judgment is expected to bring an end to the

litigation of the parties at hand. In other words, it should reveal the winning and

the loosing party in the case. Unless a judgment manifests the favored and

disfavored party, then it is not a judgment at all.

e) Judgment is the final adjudication of a case. Once a judicial body gives

judgment over a certain case, it can not review the same case for the second

time. Thus, judgment should mark the final judicial act in terms of the body

which reviews the case unless the law authorizes the same body to review its

judgment for reason provided in the law.

8. Legal Research must include both the fact and the law. A list of the

material facts should be made. This can be done by underlining the notes taken

of the trial or the argument. The research should determine how the law is to be

applied to those facts. At this stage the preliminary conclusion made under the

prewriting stage may be changed .The issues, factual or legal, should be

concisely identified. The point of the discussion must be known before the writer

can attempt to answer it .The possible alternative solutions can then be listed.

This provides the working guide for the writing process.

Drafting can begin now .The judge should start by making a choice of the legal

precept to be followed. Then, an outline should be drawn organizing the

materials into a logical sequence. Some items that were considered necessary

to the pre-writing phase can be eliminated. Other items may be added .At this

3

stage, the goal is to articulate why the reasoning is correct, and how it supports

the conclusion being advanced. The writer’s main objective is to persuade the

reader that the result reached is the only logical way to dispose of this

particular case.

9. During the drafting phase, while focusing up on the facts and then the

law, new solution and ideas become readily available. Justification for one

conclusion may disappear while justification for another may be discovered.

Progressive reasoning may require several changes in the direction of the

writing. Drafting is peculiarly suitable for the exploration of ideas. It is the

vehicle used to examine alternatives in reasoning while offering a means for

testing that reasoning. Thus, flawed reasoning becomes immediately

discernible. When this happens, it may alter the entire course of the writing.

Such changes can be made easily during the drafting phase and are an

indication of a healthy approach to the judicial task of decision making. Drafting

gives the judge flexibility and permits changes before the actual writing beings.

The draft is now ready for revision and the actual writing may begin. Once the

draft is satisfactory, the sequence may be changed for an easier understanding.

An item that adds nothing to the discussion may be eliminated. Repetitions of

words, phrases, or ideas may be removed to shorten the writing as long as the

meaning remains clear. The original materials may be completely reorganized or

rewritten. Additionally, materials presented in one way may be more efficiently

presented in another. Any change that will aid understanding or readability

should be made.

10. Editing follows next. Once the revised draft has been produced, the

sentences may be restructured with a view to adding strength or more precise

meaning. Grammar, spelling and punctuation should be corrected. Form should

be checked for consistency in the use of capitalization, spellings, and

hyphenation. Missing letters words or phrases should be added. Redundant

information should be deleted. Over use of a word or phrase should be strike

out. An unintentional emphasis or deemphasize should be eliminated. The

logical development of the discussion and the flow of the reasoning should be

examined. Transitional sentences should be added to improve the reader’s

understanding. There should be consistency in the use of the same word to

refer to the same thing. Thus, editing produces the final draft, i.e., the

judgment. Once retyped, it should be proof read carefully. It should represent a

cohesive dialogue with a logical progression of ideas starting from the

4

beginning, proceeding through the reasoning process and concluding in the

disposition. In case of hand written judgments, which are prevalent especially in

countries like ours, the judge’s hand writing is also an important concern in

judgment writing.

11. Essential Elements of a written Judgment

Mention, as regards the possible content of written judgments has been made

at different levels in previous discussions in this material. It is also seen that

judgments to be written by a court could have different forms based on the

nature of the case, magnitude/seriousness of the case, the nature of the

litigation, the nature of the parties involved and so on. Consequently, it is true

that one may come across varying kinds of judgments in our legal systems.

However, it should be underlined that all written judgments exhibit some

common and essential features despite the fact that the nature of the

case/Litigation is different.

12. It is possible to sort out the following elements as an essential and

common feature to almost all kinds of written judgments. For the purpose of

convenience, let’s see written judgments by categorizing them broadly in to civil

judgments and criminal judgments.

Essential elements of civil written judgments:-

1. The name of the court giving the judgment and its bench.

2. Date and file number of the case.

3. Name of the judge(s) presiding over the bench.

4. Name of the parties involved in the case and their attorneys, if any

5. The judgment, Which should necessarily include:- − Summary of the case

− The issue(s) framed for determination.

− Mention as to the hearing of the parties and their evidences

− Mention as to analysis of facts, evidences and the relevant laws

− Application of the pertinent legal provision to the case.

− Decision of the court along with the reasons for making the decision.

13. The Decree which among other things should necessarily make mention

of the respective rights and duties of the parties involved in the case.

Essential elements of criminal written judgments:-

1. Name of the court giving the judgment and its bench.

5

2. Date and file number of the case

3. Name of the judge(s) presiding over the bench

4. Name of the parties, involved in the case usually the prosecution and the

person alleged to have committed an offence.

5. The judgment of the court – which should incorporate − The offence said to

have been committed

− Mention as to preliminary objections and plea of guilt on the part of the

accused.

− Hearing of evidences of the parties.

− Mention as to analysis of facts, evidences and relevant laws

− Decision of the court with respect to the guiltiness of the accused.

6. Comment of the parties as to penalty, provided that the accused is found

guilty of the crime he/she is charged with.

7. The penalty

8. The decree, usually as to how and by whom the judgment should be

executed

However, the reader should take heart that the above presented features of a

written judgment are only the basic and essential elements that even written

judgment, under normal circumstances, need to incorporate and not the only

elements that could be enshrined in all written judgments.

14. In the above discussion, an attempt has been made to deal with the basic

constitutional principles, substantive and procedural rules that need to be taken

in to account while writing a judgment. Moreover, the essential elements in

almost all written judgments are discovered. In connection to these, the

forthcoming section will try to investigate the judgments to be written by trial

courts, appellate courts and cassation division of supreme courts as a distinct

venue of adjudication.

15. As has been repeatedly said, the task of judgment writing is not only a

purposeful undertaking but also is a task requiring some rules to be followed in

conducting it. Judgment writing has its own rules. The rules that should be

observed while writing judgments may govern the nature, purpose, content,

and structure of the overall judgment to be written.

6

16. FEATURES OF GOOD AND BAD WRITTREN JUDGMENTS

The main features and attributes of good and bad judgments, among others,

can be expressed in terms of the following standards:-

1. Clarity: - judgments need to be written in clear and precise manner so that

one who reads them can easily understand. In order for a judgment to be taken

as a good one, it ought to be written in a clear and precise language. As such,

as far as possible technical/professional terms should be avoided or substituted

by other simple and clear equivalent terms in meaning the message is likely to

be clear, In other words, good judgments are expected to avoid the usage of

jargons and long sentences. In line with this, it avoids sarcasm, proverbs,

colloquialism or slang (informal) language as it may affect the court decorum.

2. Comprehensiveness: - if written judgments are to convey the fullest

message in connection to the case, to the judgment audience, they should be

comprehensive in the sense that they included all necessary things/parts in

relations to the over all nature of the case, the court proceeding conducted, the

decision of the court along with its reasoning and the decree as to how the

judgment should be executed.

3. Relevancy and Irrelevancy of Facts; Evidence and Law :- all good

judgments should not include all material facts, evidences and related laws in

the written form for the sake of comprehensiveness or should not leave out

necessary facts and evidences from mentioning them for the sake of

conciseness and preciseness. But, should employ the standard of relevancy to

these and identify and incorporate in the written judgment only those relevant

to the determination of the case/dispute before hand. Hence, good written

judgments usually manage to avoid citing irrelevant law to the case or

explaining writing irrelevant facts and evidences.

4. Logical progression coherence: - good written judgments can also be

characterized by the coherence and consistency of ideas it provides to the

readers. If the written judgment is presented in a manner which lacks some

kind of flow impeding the reader from grasping the correct story of the case,

then it can not be categorized as good written judgment.

5. Organizational structure: - judgments when reduced in to writing should

be structurally organized in a manner that they could be easily understood on

the part of the judgment audience. Good judgments usually begin with

introducing the overall court proceedings and then it comes to an end by

7

providing the decision of the court and its reasoning. Thus, written judgments

which failed to present the judgment audience with the appropriate structural

organization of the overall disposition of the case can not be categorized as

good written judgment.

6. Citing documents evidences and laws:-if documents which have

evidentiary value needed to be embodied in the written judgment, the

document should be accurately cited including the date it was written, the

person(s) or authority who wrote it and the number, if any, and the type of the

document. If there arises a need also to incorporate any written work, the rules

pertaining to citation should be used in the written judgment. As such, it is only

when judgments accurately make reference to the materials or documents or

laws that the written judgment can be categorized as good one (in case of

making reference to laws too, this written judgment should clearly cite the

specific legal provision used along with the family of law the provision is found).

7. Missing Issue framing: - if judgments fail to incorporate the issue in the

written form it amounts to rendering decision without the existence of any

dispute between the parties to the case when in fact there is, no court case

without a dispute or issue.

Hence, good written judgments usually embody the issue in clear manner

and decide upon same at the end of the court proceeding.

8. Writing names of parties, witnesses & their titles: - It is also found to

be important for a written judgments to write the names of parties litigating,

the witnesses along with their titles properly and uniformly so that the decision

to be give on the bases of same could be relied on or to avoid confusion/

vagueness as to these names refer to. Good written judgments normally cite

the names of parties and witnesses clearly and uniformly in the body of

judgment by using formal and objective language.

9. Judgment on the basis of evidence/authority:- good written judgments

incorporate the decision of a court which is given only on the basis of a material

evidence as presented by the parties and in accordance with the letter and spirit

of the law, thereby avoiding the use of personal knowledge of the judge(s).

10. Hypothetical cases:- using hypothetical cases while writing judgments are

characteristic features of bad written judgments. Hence it is advisable not to

use hypothetical examples or discussions in writing judgments as it may open

8

doubts in interpretation, usually judges use hypothetical cases or examples for

the purpose of explanation.

11. Balance: - good written judgments are expected to be objective and not

subjective. It should not reflect internal display of sentiments and emotions of

the writing judge. The judge neither rewards virtues nor chastises vice. Hence,

the judge should administer even-handed justice being impartial whether the

parties may be private vs. government, rich vs. poor literate vs., illiterate,

official vs., ordinary person etc. A judge gives judgment using only facts,

evidences and the law.

12. Laconic Judgments: - these are judgments written in a short manner to

the effect that the judgments lack important facts so as to understand the case.

Such kind of judgments may need to refer other materials to have a clear

picture of the case. It may lack also clarity to all judgment audiences including

to the parties as well as to the appellate courts .Good judgments usually avoid

such kind of problems while writing the judgments

13. Lopsidedness: - Good judgments are always those which manifest that

equivalent attention and place to both or all party's argument in discussing their

points in decision making and judgment writing is given by the court/judge(s).

Normally, the judge is not expected to unnecessarily emphasize or deemphasize

either of the parties' facts, evidences and arguments .However, this should not

be construed to mean that the court may not finally favor the argument of one

of the parties in disposing the case or determining the out come of the case.

14. Language to be sober and temperate: - It is important also to use sober

and temperate words while writing judgments so that the written judgment can

be categorized as a good one. The language used in writing judgments should

not be hard that emphasized or deemphasized or should not be discriminating,

defamatory or that could affect feeling of the parties involved in the case in

particular and the larger public in general.

15. Judgment is not substitute of the file:- in principle written judgments

should be short and provided in clear manner. A judgment is not expected

normally to incorporate every proceedings conducted in side the court room.

Rather, it should be short, precise presenting summary of the file, written in the

judge's own words. As such, good written judgments are usually short but

comprehensive in the sense that it has the capacity to convey the reader the

whole matter embodied in the case.

9

16. Acronyms or abbreviations: - a good written judgment usually never

uses abbreviations. Judgment when reduced to writing, it becomes a public as

well as a historical document that will serve the future generation besides being

a mere document which brings an amicable solution to the parties in the

dispute. Abbreviations normally create ambiguity, hence the writing judge

should avoid the usage of abbreviations, however, if there is a need to use

abbreviations, the proper and full meaning of the abbreviation used must be

provided in the written judgment.

17. Remarks to be based on evidences: - good written judgment usually

manifest the fact that the court has taken cognizance of some important

remarks to be used in the proceedings of a case as well as in the judicial writing

in connection to evidences. For example in criminal cases the judge should give

concern to what is called the principle of "presumption of innocence unless

proved guilty". Thus, the judge should avoid the usage of words that reflect the

guiltiness of the accused/suspect before rendition of judgment/. The same is

true in civil cases with respect to words imposing liability on parties before

decision is reached at by the court to that effect.

18. Excitability:-beyond and above all things written judgments can be

categorized as good or bad in relation to the problem they could pose by the

time of execution. Good judgments are those having a conclusion provided in

clear and concise terms leaving a fertile ground for an easy execution.

On the part of the reader, however, it should be noted that the

parameters listed above, which are used to differentiate good written judgments

from bad written judgments are not exhaustive. Other standards which may be

helpful in making the distinction could exist though they are not included in the

above list.

(B.DEVENDRA REDDY)

Junior Civil Judge,

Madakasira. Anantapuramu District.

NOTES ON THE TOPIC OF CANNONS OF JUDICIAL ETHICS, CONDUCT, CHARACTER

AND INTEGRITY OF JUDICIAL OFFICER

A model code of judicial conduct:-

Canon:-1

A Judge shall of hold and promote the Independence, integrity and impartiality of the Judiciary,

and shall avoid impropriety the appearance of impropriety,

(a) compliance with the law,

(b) promoting confidence in the Judiciary,

(c) Avoiding abuse of prestige of Judicial office,

Canon-2:-

A Judge shall perform the duties of Judicial office impartially, competently, and diligently.

(a) A Judge shall act at all times in a manner that promote public confidence in the independence,

integrity, and impartiality of the Judiciary and shall avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety,

(b) A Judge shall comply with law including Judicial conduct (c) A Judge shall not abuse the

prestige of the judicial office to advance the personal or economic interests of the Judge or others, or

allow others to do so.

Canon-3:-

A Judge shall conduct judge's personal and extra Judicial activities to minimize the risk of

conflict with obligation of judicial office.

Canon:-4

A Judge or candidate for Judicial office shall not engage in political or campaign activity that is

inconsistent with the, integrity, or impartiality of the judiciary .

Code of Judicial Conduct:- (for the state of Florida)

1) A Judge shall uphold the integrity and Independence of Judiciary

2) A judge shall Avoid Impropriety and the Appearance of impropriety in all

of the Judge's Activities

3) A Judge shall Perform the Duties of Judicial office Impartially and diligently.

4) A Judge is Encouraged to Engage in Activities to prove the law, the legal

system and the Administration of Justice.

5) A Judge shall Regulate Extra judicial activities to Minimize the risk of

conflict in Judicial duties.

//2//

6) Fiscal Matters of Judge shall be conducted in a manner that does not give

the appearance of the influence or impropriety, etc.,

7) A Judge or candidate for judicial office shall refrain from inappropriate

political activity.

Code of Judicial conduct

Our legal system is based on the principle that an independent, fair and competent Judiciary will

interpret and apply the laws that govern us. The role of the judiciary is central to American concepts of

justice and the rule of law. Intrinsic to all sections of this Code of Judicial Conduct are the precepts that

Judges, individually and collectively, must respect and Honor the judicial office as a public trust and

strive to enhance and maintain confidence in our legal system. The judge is an arbiter of facts and law for

the resolution of disputes and a highly visible symbol of Government under the rule of law.

The Code of Judicial conduct is not intended as an exhaustive guide for the conduct of judges.

They should also be governed in their judicial and personal conduct by general ethical standards. The

code is intended, however, to state basic standards which should govern the conduct of all judges and to

provide guidance to assist judges in establishing and maintaining high standards of judicial and personal

conduct.

1. Upholding the integrity and Independence of the Judiciary:-

An independent and Honorable Judiciary is indispensable to justice in our society. A Judge

should participated in establishing, maintaining and enforcing high standards of conduct , and should

personally observe those standards so that the integrity and independence of the judiciary is preserved.

The provisions of this code are to be construed and applied to further the objective.

2: Avoiding Impropriety and the Appearance of impropriety in all of the Judge's Activities:-

A. A Judge shall comply with the law and should act at all times in a manner that promotes public

confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the Judiciary.

B. A Judge shall not allow any relationship to influence judicial conduct or judgment. A judge shall

not lend the prestige of Judicial office to advance the private interest of the judge or others; nor shall a

judge convey or permit others to convey the impression that they are in a special position to influence the

judge. A Judge shall not testify Voluntarily as a character witness.

C. A Judge shall not knowingly hold membership in any organization that practices discrimination

prohibited by law.

//3//

Canon.3:- Performing the Duties of Judicial office impartially and diligently:-

A. Judicial duties in General:- The Judicial duties of a Judge take precedence over all the Judge's

other activities. Judicial duties include all the duties of the Judge's office prescribed by law. In the

performance of these duties, the following standards apply;

B. Adjudicative Responsibilities.

(1) A Judge shall hear and decide matters assigned to the Judge except those in which

disqualification is required or refusal is appropriate.

(2) A Judge should be faithful to the law and shall maintain professional competence in it. A judge

shall not be swayed by partisan interests, public clamor, or fear of criticism.

(3) A Judge shall require order and decorum in proceedings before the Judge.

(4) A Judge shall be pa0tient, dignified and courteous to litigants, jurors, Witnesses, lawyers and

others with whom the Judge deals in an official capacity, and should require similar conduct of lawyers,

and of staff, court officials and others subject to the Judge's direction and control.

(5) A Judge shall perform Judicial duties without bias or prejudice.

(6) A Judge shall not, in the performance of judicial duties , by words or conduct manifest bias or

prejudice, including but not limited to bias or prejudice based upon race, sex, religion, national origin,

disability, age, sexual orientation or socioeconomic status, and shall not knowingly permit staff, court

officials and others subject to the Judge's direction and control to do so.

(7) A Judge shall require lawyers in proceedings before the court to refrain from manifesting, by

words or conduct, bias or prejudice based on race, sex, religion, national origin, disability, age, sexual

orientation or socioeconomic status against parties, Witnesses, counsel or others. This requirement does

not preclude legitimate advocacy when any of these factors is an issue in the proceeding.

(8) A Judge shall accord to every person who has a legal interest in a proceeding, or that person's

lawyer, the right to be heard according to law. A judge shall not initiate, permit, or consider ex parte

communications or other communications made to the Judge outside the presence of the parties between

the Judge and a party, an attorney, a guardian or attorney ad item, an alternative dispute resolution neutral,

or any other court appointee concerning the merits of a pending or impending judicial proceeding. A

Judge shall require compliance with

//4//

this subsection by court personnel subject to the Judge's direction and control. This subsection does not

prohibit.

(a) Communications concerning uncontested administrative or uncontested procedural matters;

(b) Conferring separately with the parties and or their lawyers in an effort to mediate or settle

matters, provided, however, that the Judge shall first give notice to all parties and not thereafter hear any

contested matters between the parties except with the consent of all parties;

(c) Obtaining the advice of a disinterested expart on the law applicable to a proceeding before the

judge if the Judge gives notice to the parties of the person consulted and the substance of the advice, and

affords the parties reasonable opportunity to respond;

(d) consulting with other judges or with court personnel;

(e) Considering an ex parte communication expressly authorized by law.

(9) A Judge should dispose of all Judicial matters promptly, efficiently and fairly.

(10) A Judge shall abstain from public comment about a pending or impending proceeding which may

come before the Judge's court in a manner which suggests to a reasonable person the Judge probable

decision on any particular case. This prohibition applies to any candidate for judicial office. With respect

to judicial proceedings pending or impending in the court on which the candidate would serve if elected.

A Judge shall require similar abstention on the part of Court personnel subject to the Judge's direction

and control. This section does not prohibit Judges from making public statement in the course of their

official duties or from explaining for public information the procedures of the court. This section does not

apply to proceedings in which the judge or judicial candidate is a litigant in a personal capacity.

(11) A Judge shall not disclose or use, for any purpose unrelated to judicial duties, nonpublic

information acquired in a Judicial capacity. The discussions, votes, positions taken, and Writing of

appellate judges and court personnel about causes are confidences of the court and shall be revealed only

through a Court's Judgment, a written opinion or in accordance with Supreme Court guidelines for a court

approved history project.

C. Administrative Responsibilities:-

(1) A Judge should diligently and promptly discharge the Judge's administrative responsibilities

without bias or prejudice and maintain professional competence in Judicial administration and should

cooperate with other Judges and court officials in the administration of Court business.

//5//

(2) A Judge should require staff court officials and others subject to the Judge's direction and control

to observe the standards of fidelity and diligence that apply to the Judge and to refrain from manifesting

bias or prejudice in the performance of their official duties.

(3) A Judge with supervisory authority for the Judicial performance of other judges should take

reasonable measure to assure the prompt disposition of matters before them and the proper performance

of their other judicial responsibilities.

(4) A Judge shall not make unnecessary appointments. A Judge shall exercise the power of

appointment impartially and on the basis of merit. A Judge shall avoid nepotism and favoritism. A Judge

shall not approve compensation of appointees beyond the fair value of services rendered.

(5) A Judge shall not fail to comply with Rule 12 of the Rules of Judicial Administration knowing

that the failure to comply is in violation of the rule.

D. Disciplinary Responsibilities:-

(1) A Judge who receives information clearly establishing that another judge has committed a

violation of this code should take appropriate action. A Judge having knowledge that another judge has

committed a violation of this code that raises a substantial question as to the other judge's fitness for

office shall inform the State Commission on judicial Conduct or take other appropriate action.

(2) A Judge who receives information clearly establishing that a lawyer has committed a violation of

the Taxes Disciplinary Rules of Professional conduct should take appropriate action. A Judge having

knowledge that a lawyer has committed a violation of the Taxes Disciplinary Rules of Professional

conduct that that raise a substantial question as to the lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a

lawyer in other respects shall inform the office of the general Counsel of the state bar of Texas or take

other appropriate action.

Cannon 4:- Conducting the Judge's Extra -Judicial Activities to Minimize the Risk of Conflict with

Judicial Obligations:-

A Judge shall conduct all of the Judge's extra-Judicial activities so that they do not:

(1) Cast reasonable doubt on the Judge's capacity to act impartially as a Judge;

or

(2) Interfere with the proper performance of Judicial duties.

B. Activities to Improve the Law:- A Judge may;

(1) Speak. Write. Lecture, teach and participate in extra -Judicial activities concerning the law, the

legal system, the administration of justice and non-legal subjects. Subject to the requirements of this

code; and

//6//

(2) Serve as a member, officer, or director of an organization or Governmental agency devoted to the

improvement of the law, the legal system, or the administration of justice. A Judge may assist such an

organization in raising funds and may participate in their management and investment, but should not

personally participate in public fund raising activities. He or she may make recommendations, to public

and private fund-granting agencies on projects and programs considering the law, the legal system and the

administration of justice.

C. Civic or Charitable Activities:- A Judge may participate in civic and charitable activities that do

not reflect adversely upon the Judge's impartiality or interfere with the performance of Judicial duties. A

Judge may serve as an officer, director, trustee or non-legal advisor of an educational, religious,

charitable, fraternal, or civic organization not conducted for the profit of its members, subject to the

following limitations:

(1) A Judge should not serve if it is likely that the organization will be engaged in proceedings that

would ordinarily come before the Judge or will be regularly or frequently engaged in adversary

proceedings in any Court.

(2) A Judge shall not solicit funds for any educational, religious, charitable, fraternal or civic

organization, but may be listed as an officer, director, delegate, or trustee of such an organization, and

may be a speaker or a guest of Honor at an organization's fund raising events.

(3) A Judge should not give investment advise to such an organization, but may serve on its board of

directors or trustees even though it has the responsibility for approving investment decisions.

D. Financial Activities.

(1) A Judge shall refrain from financial and business dealings that end to reflect adversely on the

Judge's impartiality, interfere with the proper performance of the judicial duties, exploit his or her judicial

position, or involve the judge in frequent transactions with lawyers or persons likely to come before the

court on which the Judge serves. This limitation does no prohibit either a Judge or candidate from

soliciting funds for appropriate campaign or officeholder expenses as permitted by state law.

(2) Subject to the requirements of subsection (1), a Judge may hold and manage investments,

including real estate, and engage in other remunerative activity including the operation of a business. A

Judge shall not be an officer, director or manager of a publicly owner business. For purposes of this

Canon, a “Publicly owned business” is a business having more than ten owners who are not related to the

Judge by consanguinity or affinity within the third degree of relationship.

//7//

(3) A Judge should manage any investments and other economic interest to minimize the number of

cases in which the Judge is disqualified. As soon as the Judge can do so without serious financial

detriment, the judge should divest himself or herself of investments and other economic interests that

might require frequent disqualification. A Judge shall be informed about the Judge's personal and

fiduciary economic interests, ad make a reasonable effort to be informed about the personal economic

interests of any family member residing in the Judge's household.

(4) Neither a Judge nor a family member residing n the Judge's household shall accept a gift,

bequest, favor, or loan from anyone except as follows:

(a) A Judge may accept a gift incident to a public testimonial to the judge; books and other resource

materials supplied by publishers on a complimentary basis for official use; or an invitation to the Judge

and spouse to attend a Bar-related function or activity devoted to the improvement of the law, the legal

system , or the administration of Justice;

(b) A Judge or a family member residing in the Judge's household may accept ordinary social

hospitality; a gift, bequest, favour or loan from a relative; a gift from a friend for a special occasion such

as a wedding, engagement, anniversary, or birthday, if the gift is fairly commensurate with the occasions

and the relationship; a loan from a lending institution in its regular course of business on the same terms

generally available to persons who are not judges; or a scholarship or fellowship awarded on the same

terms applied to other applicants;

(c) A Judge or a family members residing n the Judge's household may accept any other gift, bequest,

favor or loan only if the donor is not a party or person whose interest have come or are likely to come

before the Judge;

(d) A gift , award or benefit incident to the business, profession or other separate activity of a spouse

or other family member residing in the Judge's household, including gifts, awards and benefits for the use

of both the spouse or other family member and the judge (as spouse or family member). Provided the

gift, award or benefit could not reasonably be perceived as intended to influence the Judge in the

performances of Judicial duties.

E. Fiduciary Activities.

(1) A Judge shall not serve as executor, administrator or other personal Representative, trustee,

guardian, attorney in fact or other fiduciary, except for the estate, trust or person of a member of the

judge's family , and then only if such service will not interfere with the proper performance of judicial

duties.

//8//

(2) A Judge shall not serve as a fiduciary if it is likely that the judge as a fiduciary will be engaged in

proceedings that would ordinary come before the Judge, or if the estate, truest, or ward becomes involved

in adversary proceedings in the court on which the Judge serve or one under its appellate jurisdiction.

(3) The same restrictions on financial activities that apply to a Judge personally also apply to the

judge while acting in a fiduciary capacity.

F. Service as Arbitrator or Mediator:- An active full-time judge shall not act as an arbitrator or

mediator for compensation outside the judicial system, but a Judge may encourage settlement n the

performance of officials duties.

G. Practice of Law:- A Judge shall not practice law except as permitted by statue or this code.

Notwithstanding this prohibition, a Judge may act prose and may, without compensation, give legal

advice to and draft or review documents for a member of the Judge's family.

H. Extra-Judicial Appointments: Except as otherwise provided by constitution and statue, a Judge

should not accept appointment to a Governmental committee, commission, or other position that is

concerned with issues of fact or policy on matters other than the improvement of the law, the legal

system, or the administration of justice. A Judge, however, may represent his or her country, state, or

locality on ceremonial occasions or in connection with historical, educational , and cultural activities.

Character and integrity of Judicial officer:-

The late chief Justice Bora Laskin listed a number of qualities which he felt were essential to being a

good judge - character; integrity; honesty; industry; life experience, which can include politics; flexibility

of mind; knowledge of the law; willingness to lister - but indicated that not all were easily ascertainable

in advance, and some “must be taken on expectancy”. (6)

An empirical study of Alberta Judges conducted by P.McCormick and I. Greene shows that

knowledge of the law was not at the top of the list of desirable qualities identified by the judges

themselves. McCormick and Greene asked judges, from the Provincial Court to the Court of Appeal,

what characteristics they though made good judges. The top seven must mentioned qualities in order of

frequency were as follows.

1. Industry , diligence

2. Courtesy

3. empathy

4. Patience

5. Knowledge of the law

6. Intelligence

7. Sense of fair play

//9//

These judges esteemed humanity, patience and courtesy at roughly the same level as knowledge

of the law or intelligence, Equally interesting were some of the qualities that were mentioned only once

or twice; independence and objectivity. It is ironic to note that text writers and judicial councils tell us

this is the very essence of being a Judge. This clashes with the Judicial self-assessment of the qualities

required for good judging. Yet the traditional version of the judge continues to dominate the republic's

perception. It is necessary to expose these myths if express code of conduct are to be accepted.

One of the burdens of being a Judge is that one is expected to rise above mere mortal status and

dispense justice with an objectivity that borders on the divine. Independent from the pressures of

everyday life and free of political influences, the Judge is to resolve difficult legal disputes with the

wisdom of a Solomon. This is the ideali9zed version of the Judge and is at best something to aspire to. It

tends to obscure the human dimensions of the practical task of Judging.

I conclude by reminding you that the law has two faces. It is, firstly, a practical craft and one

whose texture is highly technical and precise. It is, secondly, a human process whose polar star is the

protection and development of human dignity.

Given the high expectations that we have for judges, it is little wonder that we forget that they are

human beings with the attendant strengths and weaknesses. Judges should aspire to objectivity but they

cannot avoid being shaped by their background and life experiences.

The element of objectivity clearly distinguishes the judiciary from the other branches of

Government and makes its members the logical choice to chair a Government commission Judges are

prized for their impartiality and willingness to listen to all sides of an argument with an open mind,.

Allegations of bias or partiality would be fatal to public confidence in the Judiciary, so cautious restraint

was seen as the best road to neutrality. Judges were also expected to stay away from the legislative or

police role or engage in it in a very limited way:

In spite of the judge's role as legislator, justice must be administered according to law, not according to

the Judge's individual sense of justice. The Judge's legislative competence is narrower than that of the

legislator, His/her role is to legislate between the gaps, to fill the open space in the law. Thus the rule of

law is maintained.

NOTES ON “CANNONS OF JUDICIAL ETHICS, CONDUCT, CHARACTER AND INTEGRITY

OF A JUDICIAL OFFICER”

POEM

HE IS INDEPENDENT Like his Institution and Country.

His family ranges in ranks from Countryside to Countrywide.

He takes support only from his Lord and his family.

Condemnation and Commendation are unknown to him.

Partiality, prejudices, hatred, favorisam, greed, influence, conspiracy

and instigation are his enemies.

Honesty, modesty, fearlessness, impartiality, mercy, equality are his

friends and ornaments.

He lives under the shadow of self-inflicted morales and legacy left by

his predecessors in life and on paper.

His mind thinks rationally and logically, eyes always search equality,

tongue always speaks truth and deals with emotions, and his hand always writes

„reasonably‟ and he walks on the path called „Procedure‟.

His personality is sober, he is gentle. He follows his own scripture

and apart “Constitution”, and he is a secular man like his country and

constitution and he prefers no religion, caste or sex.

He is restless, and works round the clock at his work place and

residence and he cries when the declerant dying cries, and smiles when the

victim smiles.

He is, as stubborn as a rock, on the crown chair, and he is a friend to

the victims and enemy to the wrongdoers. He smiles from the crown chair on the

arrogance of the representatives of the parties before him.

He and his institution still hold the ground, when the other two wings

lost confidence of the countrymen.

He is the only hope of the Nation.

He borrows Law from the Legislatures, interprets and corrects it and

commands for implementation, and always strives for the welfare of his

countrymen.

That is why the stanza of a poem of Rabindranath Tagore “where the

mind is without fear and the head is held high …………. where the words come

out from the depth of truth; where tireless striving stretches its arms towards

perfection; where the clear stream of reason has not lost its way” quit frankly

suits him.

Oh! Countrymen, Do you know, who is he? He is not the God, nor a

Savior of yours lives, but he is Guardian of your rights – human, fundamental,

civil, religious, without which the life is not real, and he is none other than a

Judge of your country.

(SYED KALEEMULLA), Junior Civil Judge,

Tadipatri.

1

Canons of Judicial Ethics, Conduct, Character

&

Integrity of a Judicial Officer

My lord Sri Justice Naveen Rao garu,

I deem it a sacred duty to submit paper on Ethics being entrusted by the

Hon‟ble High Court in the work shop being held on 26-09-2015 in the District

Court, Ananthapuramu. The topic on Ethics is at the outset un codified, infinitive

and an ocean. As a matter of fact, it is a Hercules task to define and understand the

term “Ethics”. However I would like to venture to deal with this topic with the

permission of the Hon‟ble Administrative Judge in the capacity of Presiding

Officer of work shop.

One day, during the morning walk in my Bungalow it has struck in my mind

why can‟t the word “Ethics” as in the case of word „police‟ be dissected which

stands for Politeness, Obedience, Loyalty, Industrious and Courteous, instead of

borrowing the meaning of Ethics as defined by great scholars/Stall warts.

Immediately I put it in action in the following manner:

ETHICS

E Etiquette

T Trust

H Honesty

I Impartiality

C Courtesy

S Sagacity

2

2

Now, is apt to deal with these inbuilt qualities one after the other, in

nutshell:

Etiquette: Etiquette is a code of behavior that delineates expectations for social

behavior according to contemporary conventional norms within a society, social

class or group. One should maintain at any cost professional etiquette.

Trust: The dictionary meaning of the word Trust is firm belief in someone. The

Judicial Officers should gain Trust from the litigant public.

Honesty: A man free of deceit, “Truthful and sincere”. Thus all human beings

on this earth should have honest living. In the case of Judicial Officers, they must

not only be honest to the core, but should not create even a room of doubt in the

minds of litigant public from the temple of Justice.

Integrity: The ordinary meaning of the term Integrity is the quality of having

strong moral principles, so also internal consistency and free from corruption.

Every person more so the Judicial Officer should promote integrity.

Courteous: One should be polite, respectful and considerate. Coming to the

Judiciary, the Judge must treat litigant public, advocates and staff in a Courteous

manner.

Sagacity: One should be sagacious by showing good Judgment.

These Ethical approaches can be inferred from the insights of Mahabharatha.

1. Utilitarian: The whole moral of Mahabharatha States that “Victory of good

over evil” against which heavy cost was paid in form of loss of great lives

this is relating to Utilitarian.

2. Under Rights and Duties the famous quote by lord Krishna “Mafaleshu

Kadachana” (do your duty and do not think about its rewards).

3. Justice and fairness: The intent of lord Krishna was to defeat the forces of

evil and to establish the Rule of Law or „Dharma‟. Where the righteous

would not only defend themselves but also triumph over evil.

4. Virtue : Earthly achievements such as wealth and power, mean nothing

without a strong moral compass to guide you.

5. Common Good: Concept of „Bahujan Hitaya Buhajan Sukhaya‟ as remind

the touch stone of decision making in righteous public policy in India since

the time of the Mahabharatha.

Ethics means the moral principles that govern a person's behaviour or the

conduct of an activity. The basic concepts and fundamental principles of decent

human conduct. It includes study of universal values such as the essential equality

of all men and women, human or natural rights, obedience to the law of land,

concern for health and safety and, increasingly, also for the natural environment.

3

3

Defining the Terms

We often use words like ethics and values, but for all the talk of ethics in law

enforcement, it's important to establish what ethics and ethical behavior are, and

what they aren't. Such a strong push exists within the law enforcement community

to uphold ethical standards, but without a clear definition of terms, such talk is

futile. To start the discussion, then, some key definitions are in order.

Values

Values is the term given to those ideas, behaviors and actions that are

important to us. Values are those things worth fighting for, and those things worth

sacrificing for. They're what we hold most dear. Our values strongly influence our

decision making and help determine where we place our emphasis in our personal

and professional lives. Values form the basis for our understanding of ethics.

Within society, we have personal values and societal values. Our personal

values are ours alone and are informed by our upbringing, cultural and ethnic

background, religious beliefs and personal experiences. Because personal values

are unique to each individual, they are generally not a proper platform on which to

base professional ethics, though they may inform how we view, appreciate and

approach ethical behavior.

There are some values, though, that are essentially universally held by a

society. These societal values are those ideals that are held most dear by a culture

or group, and these are the values from which we derive our understanding and

expectation of ethics and ethical behavior. Such ideals include:

Integrity

Honesty

Hard work

Kindness

Compassion

Empathy

Sympathy

Justice

Bravery

These ideals, these so-called universal values, help guide us toward ethical

behavior and ethical decision making. They help inform us of what is expected of

us and what actions we should take.

Ethics

Ethics is, in essence, doing the right thing, whatever that may be. The "right

thing" is based on those values society holds dear. Ethical principles are premised

on the notion that right is always right and wrong is always wrong.

When officers fail to do what is right, and especially when they do what is clearly

and blatantly wrong, they erode the public trust just a little more and further

degrade law enforcement's ability to work within the community and carry out it's

mission. Adherence to high ethical standards, then, is as vital to achieving the

overall goal of modern policing as any other tactic, technique or practice.

4

4

Promoting Ethics and Ethical Behavior

The importance of a high ethical standard in police work is impressed upon

aspiring officers from the very first days of the police academy. Agencies have

several ways to promote ethics among their ranks. First and foremost is the oath of

office that officers take.

Oath of Office

Of course the oath contains provisions about protecting, upholding and

defending the Constitution of the United States. Also contained in the oath, though,

are promises to conduct oneself soberly, honestly and honorably, to avoid

offensive behavior and to obey superior officers within the individual departments.

In essence, officers swear to be honest, upstanding citizens. They promise to

be part of the solution, not part of the problem, and above all else, they promise to

follow the rules, whether they like or agree with them or not.

Understood within the concept of acting honorably is the idea that officers

should own up to their mistakes. Far more respect is reserved for those who screw

up and admit it than those who try to hide their misdeeds or blame others for their

own shortcomings. In fact, it is an oft-repeated mantra that, in law enforcement

careers, lying will get one fired faster than anything else.

Code of Ethics

The oath of office lays the groundwork for instilling ethical behavior, but it

doesn't stop there. To help guide officers toward ethical decision making, most

agencies codify those practices that they hope to promote and those they expect

officers to avoid.

Within an agency's code of ethics are specific provisions promoting the

safeguarding of lives and property, the importance of avoiding bias and the

understanding that the badge is a symbol of the public trust.

In short, the code of ethics requires that officers are not only prepared to

enforce the law, but to follow it. They are called to be examples to the public and

to demonstrate the right way to behave, rather than the entitlement mentality they

are so often accused of exhibiting.

Representing the Badge

An important thing for officers to remember is that what they do in uniform

affects not only themselves as individuals, but their entire agency and, perhaps, the

entire profession.

All of this is well and good, but how do officers apply this code to their every day

professional lives? The short and easy answer is "do the right thing." Because

ethics are based upon societal values, it is not difficult to discern the difference

between right and wrong in nearly any situation.

As quoted by part of Potter Steawalk “Ethic is knowing the difference

between what you have a right to do and what is right to do”. In law a man guilty

when he violates the rights of others. In Ethics is guilty if he only thinks of doing

so.

5

5

Before parting with the discussion on Ethics, I would like to place before the

participants of the work shop that all the Judicial Officers, one way or the other,

enters into arena of Ethics by means of „Employees service conduct rules‟ …….

and in addition, the Hon‟ble Supreme Court of India under E-courts project by

dumping huge funds is giving top priority for transformation of technology into the

Judiciary by which means gradually eliminating the element of corruption from

judiciary, increasing transparency and quick dispensation of justice in a most

efficacious and effective manner .

Ethics is nothing but an inbuilt operational mechanism in the human body,

where one should keep it alive by observation and perception around the world by

himself. In this regard one of the great author observed as follows:

“Ethics is not definable, is not implementable, because it is not conscious; it

involves not only our thinking but also our feeling”.

I am immensely happy on account of the outstanding response from my

brother and sister Judges in the Ananthapuramu District having submitted papers

on the subjects assigned for today‟s workshop as cited supra, which could not be

fructified without the able guidance and encouragement of our Hon‟ble

Administrative Judge Sri Justice Naveen Rao garu at all times.

Submitted by

N. Ganesh Babu,

Prl. District Judge,

Ananthapuramu.

1

WRITING REASONED ORDERS

The litigant public approach the Court to get their grievances resolved. More

often than not the disputes result in Judicial Orders and Judgments (Except in cases

where the parties settle their disputes outside of the Court or in Lok-Adalath by filing

the compromise terms). If the Judge passes one sentence orders such as “Petition

Allowed” or “Petition Dismissed”, the litigant public and their respective counsels would

be virtually in dark as to on what grounds their petition is allowed and as to why their

petition is dismissed. So, there should be some reasons in allowing or dismissing such

petitions or applications.

Every Order of the Judge should be supported by reasons. Reason means to

draw or come to conclusion. Reasons means thinking logically. By giving reasons in his

orders the Judge would convince the parties that he has come to a certain conclusion

basing on the facts. The reasons shall be based on the material produced by the

parties.

When Judge employ good reasons, it is called cogent Order. The reasons to

reach the conclusions shall be on the accepted principles, norms and should be

believable. The reasons to reach such conclusions which make the litigant public accept

the order shall be strategically valid. The reasons shall avoid fallacies. The Judge

should place all the relevant information, which made him to reach conclusion, in his

Orders. His reasoning should be logically valid.

The Judge should employ the words such as “Therefore”, “Thus”, “Hence” and

“so” to reach conclusion. These words would help the litigant public and the respective

counsels to know the pattern in which the Judge arrived at conclusion.

The doctrine of AUDI ALTERM PARTAM has three main ingredients. The first one

is the “person who is going to be affected by the Orders should be heard” second one

is “both parties should given fair amount of opportunity to put-forth their case” and

last one is “the Judge shall apply his mind and decide the dispute by providing

reasons”.

2

The Supreme Court in the case of S.N. Mukherjee v. Union of

India [(1990) 4 SCC 594], while referring to the practice adopted and

insistence placed by the Courts in United States, emphasized the

importance of recording of reasons for decisions by the administrative

authorities and tribunals. It said “administrative process will best be

vindicated by clarity in its exercise”. To enable the Courts to exercise the

power of review in consonance with settled principles, the authorities are

advised of the considerations underlining the action under review. This

Court with approval stated:- “the orderly functioning of the process of

review requires that the grounds upon which the administrative agency

acted be clearly disclosed and adequately sustained.”

In the case of Mc Dermott International Inc. v. Burn Standard Co. Ltd. and Ors.

(2006) SLT 345, the Supreme Court clarified the rationality behind providing of

reasons and stated the principle as follows:- “. . . Reason is a ground or motive for a

belief or a course of action, a statement in justification or explanation of belief or

action. It is in this sense that the award must state reasons for the amount

awarded. The rationale of the requirement of reasons is that reasons assure that the

arbitrator has not acted capriciously. Reasons reveal the grounds on which

the Arbitrator reached the conclusion which adversely affects the interests of a party.

The contractual stipulation of reasons means, as held in Poyser and Mills’ Arbitration

in Re, `proper adequate reasons’. Such reasons shall not only be intelligible but shall

be a reason connected with the case which the Court can see is proper. Contradictory

reasons are equal to lack of reasons. . . .”

Reasons are heart beat, arteries and the brain of any Order or Judgment.

Without heart beat, blood circulation in the veins and brain, the orders are dead

letters. Such orders do not stand to the scrutiny of legal fraternity. “Reasons” are the

links between the materials on which certain conclusions are based and the

actual conclusions.

Failure to give reasons amounts to denial of justice. Reasons are live links

between the decision maker i.e. Judge and the controversy in question. If there are

no reasons it would be virtually impossible for the appeal Courts to perform their

appellate functions or exercise the power of Judicial review in adjudging the validity

of decision. Giving valid reasons is an indispensable part of sound judicial system.

3

The Supreme Court in a judgment delivered on 22nd February, 2008, in the case

of State of Rajasthan v. Rajendra Prasad Jain Criminal Appeal No. 360/2008 (Arising

out of SLP (Crl.) No. 904/2007) stated that "reason is the heartbeat of every

conclusion, and without the same it becomes lifeless."

Providing of reasons in orders is of essence in judicial proceedings. Every

litigant who approaches the Court with a prayer is entitled to know the reasons

for acceptance or rejection of such request. Either of the parties to the lis has a right

of appeal and, therefore, it is essential for them to know the considered opinion

of the Court to make the remedy of appeal meaningful. It is the reasoning which

ultimately culminates into final decision which may be subject to examination of

the appellate or other higher Courts. It is not only desirable but, in view of the

consistent position of law, mandatory for the Court to pass orders while

recording reasons in support thereof, however, brief they may be. Brevity in

reasoning cannot be understood in legal parlance as absence of reasons. While no

reasoning in support of judicial orders is impermissible, the brief reasoning would

suffice to meet the ends of justice at least at the interlocutory stages and would

render the remedy of appeal purposeful and meaningful.

The Court cannot lose sight of the fact that a losing litigant has a cause to

plead and a right to challenge the order if it is adverse to him. Opinion of the Court

alone can explain the cause which led to passing of the final order. Whether an

argument was rejected validly or otherwise, reasoning of the order alone can show.

To evaluate the submissions is obligation of the Court and to know the reasons for

rejection of its contention is a legitimate expectation on the part of the

litigant. Another facet of providing reasoning is to give it a value of precedent which

can help in reduction of frivolous litigation. Paul D. Carrington, Daniel J Meador and

Maurice Rosenburg, Justice on Appeal 10 (West 1976), observed as under:-

“When reasons are announced and can be weighed, the public can have

assurance that the correcting process is working. Announcing reasons can also

provide public understanding of how the numerous decisions of the system are

integrated. In a busy Court, the reasons are an essential demonstration that

4

the Court did in fact fix its mind on the case at hand. An unreasoned decision has

very little claim to acceptance by the defeated party, and is difficult or impossible

to accept as an act reflecting systematic application of legal principles. Moreover, the

necessity of stating reasons not infrequently changes the results by forcing the

judges to come to grips with nettlesome facts or issues which their normal instincts

would otherwise cause them to avoid.”

It will be useful to refer words of Justice Roslyn Atkinson, Supreme Court of

Queensland, at AIJA Conference at Brisbane on September 13, 2002 in relation to

Judgment Writing. Describing that some judgment could be complex, in distinction to

routine judgments, where one requires deeper thoughts, and the other could be

disposed of easily but in either cases, reasons they must have. While speaking about

purpose of the judgment, he said,

“The first matter to consider is the purpose of

the judgment. To my mind there are four purposes for

any judgment that is written: - (1) to clarify your own

thoughts; (2) to explain your decision to the parties; (3)

to communicate the reasons for the decision to

the public; and (4) to provide reasons for an appeal

Court to consider.” Clarity of thought leads to proper

reasoning and proper reasoning is the foundation of a

just and fair decision.

Similar view was expressed in State of U.P. v. Battan. About two decades

back in State of Maharashtra v. Vithal Rao Pritirao Chawan the desirability of a

speaking order was highlighted. The requirement of indicating reasons has been

judicially recognised as imperative. The view was reiterated in Jawahar Lal Singh v.

Naresh Singh. In Raj Kishore Jha v. State of Bihar this Court has held that reason is

the heartbeat of every conclusion and without the same, it becomes lifeless. Right to

reason is an indispensable part of a sound judicial system; reasons at least sufficient

to indicate an application of mind to the matter before court. Another rationale is

that the affected party can know why the decision has gone against him. One of the

salutary requirements of natural justice is spelling out reasons for the order

made;.…” As observed in State of Orissa vs. Dhaniram Lunar (2004) 5 SCC 568 In

5

the light of the factual details particularly with reference to the stand taken by the

Horticulture Department at length in the writ petition and in the light of the principles

enunciated by this Court, namely, right to reason is an indispensable part of sound

judicial system and reflect the application of mind on the part of the court, we are

satisfied that the impugned order of the High Court cannot be sustained.”

Giving reasons furthers the cause of justice as well as avoids uncertainty. As a

matter of fact it helps in the observance of law of precedent. Absence of reasons on

the contrary essentially introduces an element of uncertainty, dissatisfaction and give

entirely different dimensions to the questions of law raised before the

higher/appellate courts. In our view, the court should provide its own grounds and

reasons for rejecting claim/prayer of a party whether at the very threshold i.e. at

admission stage or after regular hearing, howsoever precise they may be.

Giving reasons is a mandatory requirement of procedural law. There should be

clarity of thoughts. The Judge should explain the decision to the parties, should

communicate the reasons for his decision to the public and he should provide

reasons that an appeal Court would consider. Absence of reasons frustrate very

object of the existing judicial system. It would lead to an archaism. The orders shall

not be cryptic. The language should be simple and easily understandable. The Judge

should avoid using complex and compound sentences. If the sentences exceed more

than two lines, there is every possibility to lose the sight of idea intended to be

presented by the Judge.

The reasons in the Order need not be lengthy or in detailed way. It is suffice if

the order is precise, to the point, covering all the necessary aspects. The purpose of

giving reasons is to make the litigant public understand the mind of the Judge so also

to make the appellate Court to sit over the matter and adjudicate it.

Giving reasons in an order in a presentable manner is an art. Every Judge

should acquire these skills. Reasons are fundamental and basic principle in writing

orders. Without reasons if an Order is passed it would be vague and cryptic.

6

Even the Docket Orders are the Orders of the orders of the Court. They shall

be clear, legible and the litigant public so also their respective counsels should

understand why the matter is adjourned to the next date. The Docket Order should

also speak by itself as to what had transpired on that particular date in connection

with that case.

I believe that all the Judicial Officers are following the above principles in the

letter and spirit. This article is to enhance the skills and deepen the intelligence of

the judicial officers present here. I thank one and all for giving me this opportunity. I

particularly thank Hon’ble Administrative Judge garu for giving me this opportunity.

Thanking you,

Yours faithfully,

S.KAMALAKAR REDDY,

PRL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE, ANANTAPURAMU

1

JUDICIAL ETHICS

The Phrase “Judicial Ethics” is a very wide one. This phrase

cannot be defined or confined to a specific set of words. There is no

straight jacket formula to give an exact definition of Ethics. The

meaning of Word “Ethics” changes from time to time, place to place

and country to country.

Basically the meaning of Ethics can be said “a body of rules

followed by a group of people”. The Ethics are rules of practice. The

words morality and consciousness are intertwined with the word

“Ethics”. When it comes to “Judicial Ethics”, it is the duty or the duties

and moral of the Judge to find out what is Ethicalal meaning good and

what is unethical meaning bad. The behaviour of Judge, his conduct,

his outlook, his persona, his morality should always be ethical to the

established norms, principles in society in general and under the

Constitution in particular. What the Judge should observe during his

tenure as a Judge matters most.

The integrity, honesty, morality are attached to the Judgeship.

He should uphold the independency of the Judiciary. His behaviour,

attitude, conduct, both outside and inside the Court of law should

always be above the board and unquestionable. There is only one

standard every Judge should follow so far as the propriety and

integrity concerned.

It is said that every organ of the society has failed to live up to

the expectations of common man. As a last resort people knock the

doors of justice to get their problems solved. In the eyes of common

man the judiciary is the only organ functioning with full throttle. When

the Judge is unethical, does not live up to the standards attached to

2

the Judgeship and fail to live up to the expectations of the common

man, it is a curse not only to the general public but also to the society

at large.

There is no room for impropriety. Judge should avoid favouritism

of any kind. He should strictly go by principles of law and standards of

law fixed under Constitution of India. These principles and standards

are dynamic, changes from time to time to cater to the needs of the

general public at large which is Hallmark of every progressive society.

Judge should not be member of any organisation either non-

profit or non-governmental etc, because the general public may look at

the organisation in respect and may consider such organisations holy.

If something goes wrong in such organisations, without there being

any role or say of the Judge, people may suspect that the Judge did

something wrong. To avoid such notions or speculation the better path

the Judge should tread, is not to involve himself in any of such

organisations.

Now a days social media deeply involved in changing the

consciousness of public. Most of the Judges are the members of any

one of the prominent social media apps such as Face book, twitter and

Whats-up etc. If the Judge is a member of such social media apps, it is

better for the Judge not to express his opinion on any matter of

importance or on any matters pending before any Court. It is also

advisable to remove himself from such social apps. The reason is that

even the litigant public will have access to all such social media apps

and there is every possibility to misuse the presence of Judge in such

social media apps. The examples are galore. But a Judge may be a

member of groups of Judges to exchange views and to update himself

with the changing trends in the field of law.

3

The Judge in his day to day life has to carefully choose his

activities to avoid criticism from the public and Bar. He should avoid

engaging himself in any business, as there is a possibility that the

public may think that the Judge is abusing his position. He shall not

involve in any kind of business activities by using his position either

directly or indirectly. He shall not be member of any political

organisation even after his retirement. If a Judge is offered any such

public and politically prominent post after his retirement, it would

certainly give an impression to the general public that the Judge

showed favouritism during his tenure.

A Judge must be above the publicity. Media publicity is a

dangerous virus. Once affected by it there is no coming back. I know

some of the Judges who get every news item in which he appeared cut

them and neatly bound into a book.

Publicity mania will take Judges nowhere. There will be no

improvement so far as the subject, intelligence and intuitiveness

concerned. Once affected by publicity every Judge expects his name or

photograph appear in Newspaper. After some time if no name of the

Judge appear it would certainly sap his spirits. Publicity will not help

Judge in any manner to improve his skills required for his Judgeship.

Judges should also avoid involving themselves in such situations

and circumstances which would tend to give suspicion to the general

public. Some time without his involvement Judge may appear in

certain public functions, where either accused or complainant, plaintiff

or defendant may also participate in there and who knows, they might

have organised such public functions only to see that the Judge

appear. They give an impressions to the opposite party that the Judge

knows him well. At times without the knowledge of the Judge certainly

4

people would closely move and sit by his side or take photograph

standing alongside. Though, the Judge is honest and sincere to the

core, such unpleasant situations and circumstances would give

negative impression and impulses to the general public. What are such

public functions which would create such unpleasant situations and

circumstances cannot be put into a particular formula. It is the

consciousness of the Judge which tells him either to proceed to attend

such public functions or withhold or withdraw himself from attending

such functions.

It is stated that if you want to test a person give him power and

see his behaviour. At times even normal people, given power, would

behave abnormally. One of the nicest principle in administrative law is

“Absolute power corrupts absolutely”. So, if a person, all of a sudden

given Judgeship, there is possibility, at least remotely that such

person try to exhibit his supremacy over others. It is where the

Constitution, established norms and the provisions of law come to the

fore to put the Judge in a right track. The Judge whether given power

or not, Judge whether in service or retired should conduct himself in

such a way which is accepted by the society, established by the rule of

law. No person should take the power into head and behave

abnormally or else the very system of democratic governance would

go awry. Of course there are checks and balances in the very

democratic system enshrined in the Constitution to control such erring

persons.

The Judge should be above the board of impartiality, caste,

creed, community, place etc. He should deliver his Orders and

Judgments in accordance with the law but not considering extraneous

things, pressures or benefits. Judge should also not to pass Judgments

5

basing on his personal beliefs and ideas. His Judgment should be

tempered with grace and unbiasedness.

The language the Judge uses should be simple, understandable

to the general public. He should not use any high sounding language

and his prose should be to the point, analytical and avoiding verbosity.

The Judge would get name and fame and also bring laurels to the

system only when he delivers Judgments within a reasonable time. He

shall not sit over the file for a longer period. At the same time he shall

not rush to the case file and deliver a haphazard Judgment. He should

also give reasonable time to the respective parties and their respective

counsels to put-forth their case before him. Particularly, in Indian

context it is very difficult for the litigant public to secure documents

from the public Offices and secure witnesses who can depose truth.

Therefore, the Judge should not hasten unduly to pass Judgments

unless the case require him to do so.

The Judge shall not undertake any Academic career outside his

Judgeship. If he undertakes such career after his retirement it is OK.

While, he is in service if he undertake such a career it is nothing but

doing un-justice to the post he is holding. He is permitted to receive

fee or remuneration for the classes he undertakes and for the book he

has produced. However all these activities are subjected to rules

framed by the Hon’ble High Court and subject to CCA rules.

Judge can attend functions of the Bar Association and functions

of Advocates. Nevertheless, care must be taken in attending such

functions. It is the consciousness of the Judge as told earlier which

would guide him either to attend such functions or withdrawn himself.

As long as no obligation entertained from any members of the Bar and

6

Judge maintains uniformity in attending such functions there will not

be any objection from any quarters.

The Judge should discharge his duties with high degree of

competence. He should strive hard to deepen his knowledge in the

field of law. He should also work hard to enhance his skills in the field

of law and jurisprudence. Only when the Bar finds that the Judge is a

competent one, they can come forward, liberally, to dispose of the

cases. The Bar should also feel that they get dispassionate Judgments

from the Judge. The Judge shall not entertain any matters in which he

or his relatives remotely connected. If such situations present

themselves before a Judge he should recues himself from such matters

or better get such cases transferred.

My lord Administrative Judge, High Court of Judicature at

Hyderabad for the States of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh, Hon’ble

District Judge garu, Hon’ble District Judges, other Junior, Senior and

Colleague Judges, the above article on “Judicial Ethics” is not

exhaustive one. Things which are Ethical to some of the people may be

unethical to the other people and vice-versa. I attempted to high light

few of the cannons of judicial Ethics. I hope and believe the above

cannons would highlight the Ethics to be followed by Judges.

Thanking you,

Yours faithfully, S.KAMALAKAR REDDY,

PRL.JUNIOR CIVIL JUDGE, ANANTAPURAMU

1

Notes Submitted By G.Vani, Principal Junior Civil Judge for workshop on

26.09.2015 on “Canons of Judicial Ethics, conduct, Character and Integrity

of a Judicial Officer”.

******

Introduction:

One of the primary functions of state is administration of justice. The

judges are the pivotal in administration of justice entrusted upon them. It is

therefore judges require some basic code of conduct in discharging the

administration of justice. Those conducts are practiced over a period of

time and thereby perfected. It is therefore they are the canons to judicial

officers. The deviation of the above canons is not excusable and

unpardonable. Observance of Canons of Judicial Ethics enables the

judiciary to struggle with confidence; to chasten oneself and be wise and to

learn by themselves the true values of judicial life. The discharge of judicial

function is an act of divinity. Perfection in performance of judicial

functions is not achieved solely by logic or reason. There is a mystic power

which drives the Earth and the Sun, every breeze on a flower and every

smile on a child and every breath which we take. It is this endurance and

consciousness which enables the participation of the infinite forces which

command us in our thought and action, which, expressed in simple terms

and concisely put, is called the 'Canons of Judicial Ethics'

There are certain cardinal principles of judicial ethics that apply to

any person holding a judicial office whether at the level of subordinate

judiciary or in the highest court of the land.

Henry George said- "Generations, succeeding to the gain of their

predecessors, gradually elevate the status of mankind as coral polyps,

building one generation upon the work of the other, gradually elevate

themselves from the bottom of the sea."

Alexander Hamilton once said ___ "The judiciary . . . has no influence over

either the sword or the purse; no direction either of the strength or of the

wealth of the society, and can take no active resolution whatever. It may

truly be said to have neither Force nor Will but merely judgment? ". The

greatest strength of the judiciary is the faith of the people in it. Faith,

confidence and acceptability cannot be commanded; they have to be

earned. And that can be done only by developing the inner strength of

morality and ethics.

2

Hon‟ble Bernard L. Shientag, while giving the Third Annual Benjamin

N. Cardozo Lecture, has observed :-

“Naturally, it is in cases where the creative faculty of the judicial

process operates, where there is a choice of competing analogies, that the

personality of the judge, the individual tone of his mind, the color of his

experience, the character and variety of his interests and his

prepossessions, all play an important role. For the judge, in effect, to detach

himself from his whole personality, is a difficult, if not an impossible, task.

We make progress, therefore, when we recognize this condition as part of

the weakness of human nature.”

Judicial Ethics in India:

They are three important documents which mandates the ethic of judges in

the all levels right from Supreme Court to Sub-ordinate Courts. They are:

( i) Restatement of Values of Judicial Life adopted by the Chief Justices'

Conference of India, 1999

(ii) The Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct, 2002

(iii) The Oath of a Judge as contained in the Third Schedule of the

Constitution of India.

I. Restatement of Values of Judicial Life:

In India on 7th May 1997 a 16 point code of conduct, for ensuring

proper conduct among members of the higher judiciary was adopted by

the Judges of the Supreme Court and the High Courts with the Gujarat

High Court as the sole dissenter, reportedly. The 16 point code which the

Judges prefer to describe as “The Restatement of Values of Judicial Life” is

believed to have become effective since then. It was drafted by a

Committee of five Judges, headed by Justice Dr.A.S.Anand, as he then was.

The other members were Justice S.P.Barucha, Justice K.S.Paripoornan,

Justice M.Srinivasan and Justice D.P.Mohapatra. The 16 point code

stipulates1:

(1) Justice must not merely be done but it must also be seen as done. The

behaviour and conduct of members of the higher judiciary must

reaffirm the people‟s faith in the impartiality of the judiciary.

1 [22] Restatement of values of Judicial life available at

http://judicialreforms.org/files/restatement_of_values_jud_life.pdf (Last Visted on June 14, 2010)

3

Accordingly, any act of a Judge of the Supreme Court or a High

Court, weather in official or personal capacity, which erodes the

credibility of the perception has to be avoided.

(2) A Judge should not contest the election of any office of a Club, society

or other association; further he shall not hold such elective office

except in a society or association connected with the law.

(3) Close association with individual members of the Bar, particularly those

who practice in the same court shall be eschewed.

(4)A Judge shall not permit any member of his immediate family to, such

as spouse, son, or daughter, son-in-law, or daughter-in-law, or any

other close relative, if as member of the Bar, to appear before him or

even be associated in any manner with a case to be dealt with by him.

(5)No member of his family, who is a member of the Bar, shall be

permitted to use the residence in which the judge actually resides or

other facilities for professional work.

(6)A Judge should practise a degree of aloofness consistent with the

dignity of his office.

(7) A Judge shall not hear and decide a matter in which a member of his

family, a close relation or a friend is concerned.

(8) A Judge shall not enter into a public debate or express his views in

public on political matters or on matters that are pending or are likely

to arise for judicial determination.

(9) A Judge is expected to let his judgment speak for themselves. He shall

not give interview to the media.

(10) A Judge shall not accept gifts or hospitality except from his family,

close relations and friends.

(11) A Judge shall not hear and decide a matter in which a company in

which he holds shares is concerned unless he has disclosed his

interest and no objection to his hearing and deciding the matter is

raised.

(12) A Judge shall not speculate in shares, stocks or the like.

(13) A Judge should not engage directly or indirectly in trade or business,

either by himself or in association with any other person. (publication

4

of a legal treaties or any activity in the mature of a hobby shall not be

constructed as trade business).

(14) A Judge should not ask for accept contribute or otherwise actively

associate himself with the raising of any fund for any purpose.

(15) A Judge should not seek any financial benefit in the form of a

perquisite or privilege attached to his office unless it is clearly

available. Any doubt in this behalf must be got resolved and clarified

through the Chief Justice.

(16) Every Judge must at all times be conscious that he is under the public

gaze and there should be no act or omission by him which is

unbecoming of the high office he occupies and the public esteem in

which the office is held.

These are only the “Restatement of the Values of Judicial Life” and

are not meant to be exhaustive but illustrative of what is expected of a

Judge.

II. BANGALORE PRINCIPLES:

Although the Bangalore Draft Principles of Judicial Conduct were

created in 2001 by the judges of the common law and was revised and

adopted at the Round Table meeting of Chief Justices held at The Hague in

2002. These principles draw from the „Restatement of Judicial Values 1999.

The Bangalore principles embody the essential principles of independence;

impartiality; integrity; integrity; propriety; equality; and competence and

diligence.

(iii) The Oath of a Judge as contained in the Third Schedule of the

Constitution of India.

The oath taken by the Judges at the time of taking over the judicial

offices reminds them of their responsibilities and sums up the subject at

hand truly, fully and effectually. It obliges them to be faithful to the

Constitution of India. They undertake that they shall uphold the

sovereignty & integrity of India and to truly and faithfully perform the

duties of their offices without fear or favour, affection or ill-will and in

doing so shall render judgment to the best of their ability and knowledge.

This in a way summarizes the code of ethics for those holding judicial

offices.

5

In addition to the above documents, they are some provisions which

mandates the judicial ethics for judges in UDHR(Universal Declaration of

Human Rights) and ICCPR(International Covenant on Civil and Political

Rights)

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights that recognizes as

fundamental the principle that everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair

and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the

determination of rights and obligations and of any criminal charge; as well

as the

International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights that guarantees

that all persons shall be equal before the courts, and that in the

determination of any criminal charge or of rights and obligations in a suit

at law, everyone shall be entitled, without delay, to fair and public hearing

by a competent, independent and impartial tribunal established by law.

Judicial Ethics in Across The Globe:

USA(United States of America)

The American Bar Association formulated its Canons of Judicial Ethics for

the first time in 1924. However, these canons were intended more as

guidelines than statutory restrictions and therefore their applicability was

limited as they did not address complex ethical issues. Consequently, the

Model Code of Judicial Conduct was introduced by the ABA inn 1972 to

meet these challenges. This Code applies to all officers of the judicial

system and non lawyer judges such as town justices and justices of the

peace with the exception for part-time judges, judges pro tempore, and

retired judges. This Code provides that judges should uphold judicial

independence and integrity, avoid impropriety and the appearance of

impropriety, and be impartial and diligent in performing their duties. The

District of Columbia, the Federal Judicial Conference and as many as 47

states have adopted this code with minor changes.

CANADA

The Canadian Judicial Council which consists of all the chief justices

and associate chief justices in Canada was instrumental in the creation of

the Canadian Judicial ethical Principles in 1971 to deal with the issue of

discipline and education of judges. Interestingly, after extensive debate and

consideration including inputs from the Bertha Wilson Committee and the

Working Committee of the Canadian Judicial Council, the Judicial Council

6

decided against a elaborate code of ethics based on the American model

and in its place adopted the Ethical Principles in 1998. These principles

draw inspiration from the Magna Carta which set out that that judges well-

versed in the law be appointed and from the Act of Settlement, of 1701 that

prohibited the arbitrary removal of judges by the crown; thus paving the

way for the establishment of an independent judiciary.

AUSTRALIA

It may also be noted that the Australian „Guide to Judicial conduct‟

draws heavily from the Canadian Ethical Judicial Principles as well as from

the writings of Justice J. B. Thomas of Australia and Prof. Wood of the

University of Melbourne. The Australian guide aspires for high standards

of conduct for the community to have confidence in its judiciary. It

provides members of the judiciary with practical guidance about conduct

expected of them as holders of judicial office and also takes into account

the changes that have occurred in community standards over the years. It

assumes a high level of common understanding on the part of judges of

basic principles of judicial conduct. It also addressed issues upon which

there is greater likelihood of uncertainty.

Conduct and Character:

Man wills to obtain his objects of desires. Willing results in action.

The will that is expressed becomes conduct. Man has various sorts of

desires. Sometimes, there is conflict of desires. That desire which obtains

victory is termed „will‟. The inner disposition which makes the will

possible is called character. Character is the aggregate of peculiar qualities

which constitute personal individuality. People would refer to words

character, conduct, nature or disposition and reputation of a person. It is

said that “character‟ is what you are and “conduct” is what other see. As

Lord denning observed „ A Man‟s character, it is sometimes said, is what he

in fact is, where as his reputation is what others think he is.” Thus, nature

and disposition is what you are and reputation is what others think of you.

In other words, character and nature are inherent and internal to a person

and unseen by others, whereas conduct is manifest.

7

Integrity:

“Integrity according to Oxford dictionary is moral uprightness; honesty. It

takes in its sweep, probity, innocence, trustfulness, openness, sincerity,

blamelessness, immaculacy, rectitude, uprightness, virtuousness,

righteousness, goodness, cleanness, decency, honour, reputation, nobility,

irreproachability, purity, respectability, genuineness, moral excellence etc.

In short it depicts sterling character with firm adherence to a code of moral

values. „Judiciary is an integrity institution‟. Therefore, Judicial Officers

should possess the sterling quality of integrity. Integrity is the hallmark of

judicial discipline apart from others as reminded by the Hon‟ble Apex

Court in Tarak Singh vs. Jyoti Basu2, To quote:

“ Integrity is the hallmark of judicial discipline, apart from others. It

is high time the judiciary took utmost care to see that the temple of justice

does not crack from inside, which will lead to a catastrophe in the judicial-

delivery system resulting in the failure of public confidence in the system.

It must be remembered that woodpeckers inside pose a larger threat than

the storm outside.”

Judicial office is essentially a public trust. Society is, therefore,

entitled to expect that a Judge must be a man of high integrity, honesty and

required to have moral vigour, ethical firmness and impervious to corrupt

or venial influences. He is required to keep most exacting standards of

propriety in judicial conduct. Any conduct which tends to undermine

public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the court would be

deleterious to the efficacy of judicial process. Society, therefore, expects

higher standards of conduct and rectitude from a Judge. Unwritten code of

conduct is writ large for judicial officers to emulate and imbibe high moral

or ethical standards expected of a higher judicial functionary, as

wholesome standard of conduct which would generate public confidence,

accord dignity to the judicial office and enhance public image, not only of

the Judge but the court itself. It is, therefore, a basic requirement that a

Judge‟s official and personal conduct be free from impropriety; the same

must be in tune with the highest standard of propriety and probity. The

standard of conduct is higher than that expected of a layman and also

higher than that expected of an advocate. In fact, even his private life must

adhere to high standards of probity and propriety, higher than those

2 (2005)1 SCC 201

8

deemed acceptable for others. Therefore, the Judge can ill-afford to seek

shelter from the fallen standard in the society.3”

Conclusion:

Socrates said, four things belong to a Judge; to hear courteously, to answer

wisely, to consider soberly and to decide impartially. Hon'ble Mr. Justice

S.H. Kapadia , Chief Justice of India said: “When we talk of ethics, the

judges normally comment upon ethics among politicians, students and

professors and others. But I would say that for a judge too, ethics, not only

constitutional morality but even ethical morality, should be the base…[4]”

3 C. Ravichandran Iyer v. Justice A.M. Bhattacharjee & Ors., (1995) 5 SCC 457, para 21, per K.

4 “Kapadia cautions judges against judicial activism”, NEW DELHI, May 3, 2010 available at

http://beta.thehindu.com/news/national/article420137.ece (Last Visited on June 14, 2010).

1 S.C.J., Kadiri

Paper presented by Dr. S.Md.Fazulullah, Senior Civil Judge, Kadiri

for workshop on 26.9.2015 on “Canons of Judicial Ethics, Conduct, Character

and Integrity of a Judicial Officer”

******

Introduction

The constitution is the fundamental document. The entire

administration carried out by the State in tune with the Constitution. The

constitution divided the powers among the three organs, viz., the

Legislature, the Executive and the Judiciary.

The rule of law is the foundation of a democratic society. The

Judiciary is the guardian of the rule of law. Hence judiciary is not only the

third pillar, but the central pillar of the democratic State.¹

Thus the role assigned to the Judiciary i.e., Judges has got a

paramount importance. The Judiciary in India consists of the Judges of the

Supreme Court, the High Courts and the Subordinate Courts.

Administration of justice is stream which has to be kept pure and

clean. It has to be kept unpolluted.²

To keep the stream of justice clean and pure, the Judge must be

endowed with sterling character, impeccable integrity and upright behaviour.

Erosion thereof would undermine the efficacy of the rule of law and the

working of the Constitution itself.³

In short, the behaviour of the Judge is the bastion for the people to

reap the fruits of the democracy, liberty and justice and the antithesis rocks

the bottom of the rule of law. 4

The Judges play important role in the maintenance of rule of law

which is essential for the existence of the orderly society. It has rightly been

said that there is no office in the State of such power as that of the Judge.

Judges hold power which is immensely greater than that of any other

2 S.C.J., Kadiri

functionary. The citizen's life and liberty, reputation and property, personal

and domestic happiness are all subject to the wisdom of Judges and hang on

their decisions. Where judicial power becomes corrupt, liberty expires, no

security is left of life, reputation and property and no guarantee is left of

personal or domestic happiness. A strong impartial and capable judiciary is

the greatest need of a State.5

Complex role of Judge

The Supreme Court while pointing out the complex role of Judge in

a recent times has observed that “the extraordinary complexity of modern

litigation requires him not merely to declare the rights to citizens but also to

mould the relief warranted under given facts and circumstances and often

command the executive and other agencies to enforce and give effect to the

order, writ or direction or prohibit them to do unconstitutional acts. In this

ongoing complex of adjudicatory process, the role of the Judge is not merely

to interpret the law but also to lay new norms of law and to mould the law to

suit the changing social and economic scenario to make the ideals enshrined

in the Constitution meaningful and a reality. Therefore, the Judge is required

to take judicial notice of the social and economic ramification, consistent with

the theory of law. Thereby, the society demands active judicial roles which

formerly were considered exceptional but now a routine. The Judge must act

independently, if he is to perform the functions as expected of him and he

must feel secure that such action of his will not lead to his own downfall. The

independence is not assured for the Judge but to the judged. Independence

to the Judge, therefore, would be both essential and proper. Considered

judgment of the Court would guarantee the constitutional liberties which

would thrive only in an atmosphere of judicial independence. Every

endeavour should be made to preserve independent judiciary as a citadel of

public justice and public security to fulfil the constitutional role assigned to

3 S.C.J., Kadiri

the Judges.”6

Etymology

Amidst the above backdrop the discussion on “Canons of Judicial

Ethics, Conduct, Character and Integrity of a Judicial Officer” has got

immense say in the day-to-day administration of justice. Though the word

“Canon“ is not associated with Judiciary, judicial acts etc., directly, yet in the

usage from the times of yore, the word 'Canon' is used to project the

standards of the Judges. We do not find anywhere the etymology like the

Canons of Executive or the canons of Legislative. Almost the word Canons

find place, wherever there is discussion on Judiciary or Judges. To trace out

the etymological background of the word, Canon means, here in the context,

a general rule, standard or principle by which something is judged. Canon

means a principle or a standard for which there is no exception. For an

example, if it is said that the Judge shall be honest, for this principle there is

no exception that on such and such occasion a Judge can be dishonest. That

is the reason the word Canon is used instead of principle. It is needless to

state that for every principle there will be an exception, but for Canon there

is no exception.

Character, conduct and integrity

In an attempt to judge, the embodiment of the Judge the trio viz.,

the conduct, character and integrity form a pivotal role.

In so far as conduct and character are concerned, the Supreme

Court observed in Krishna Swami v. Union of India7 that the holder of office

of the Judge of the Supreme court or the High court should, therefore, be

above the conduct of ordinary mortals in the society. The standards of

judicial behaviour, both on and off the bench, are normally high. There

cannot, however, be any fixed or set principles, but an unwritten code of

4 S.C.J., Kadiri

conduct of well-established traditions is the guidelines for judicial conduct.

The conduct that tends to undermine the public confidence in the character,

integrity or impartiality of the Judge must be eschewed. It is expected of him

to voluntarily set forth wholesome standards of conduct reaffirming fitness to

higher responsibilities.

“Judicial office is essentially a public trust. Society is, therefore,

entitled to expect that a Judge must be a man of high integrity, honesty and

required to have moral vigour, ethical firmness and impervious to corrupt or

venial influences. He is required to keep most exacting standards of propriety

in judicial conduct. Any conduct which tends to undermine public confidence

in the integrity and impartiality of the court would be deleterious to the

efficacy of judicial process. Society, therefore, expects higher standards of

conduct and rectitude from a Judge. Unwritten code of conduct is writ large

for judicial officers to emulate and imbibe high moral or ethical standards

expected of a higher judicial functionary, as wholesome standard of conduct

which would generate public confidence, accord dignity to the judicial office

and enhance public image, not only of the Judge but the court itself. It is,

therefore, a basic requirement that a Judge's official and personal conduct be

free from impropriety; the same must be in tune with the highest standard of

propriety and probity. The standard of conduct is higher than that expected

of a layman and also higher than that expected of an advocate. In fact, even

his private life must adhere to high standards of probity and propriety, higher

than those deemed acceptable for others. Therefore, the Judge can ill-afford

to seek shelter from the fallen standard in the society.”8

In so far as the integrity of a judicial officer, the constitutional

Courts had various occasions to delve into the aspect, whereby the Division

Bench of the Hon'ble High Court of Himachal Pradesh discussed the word

integrity by holding that “integrity according to Oxford dictionary is moral

5 S.C.J., Kadiri

uprightness; honesty. It takes in its sweep, probity, innocence, trustfulness,

openness, sincerity, blamelessness, immaculacy, rectitude, uprightness,

virtuousness, righteousness, goodness, cleanness, decency, honour,

reputation, nobility, irreproachability, purity, respectability, genuineness,

moral excellence etc. In short it depicts sterling character with firm

adherence to a code of moral values. 'Judiciary is an integrity institution'.

Therefore, Judicial Officers should possess the sterling quality of integrity.“9

In Tarak Singh v. Jyoti Basu10, the Supreme Court observed that

“integrity is the hallmark of judicial discipline, apart from others. It is high

time the judiciary took utmost care to see that temple of justice does not

crack from inside, which will lead to a catastrophe in the judicial-delivery

system resulting in the failure of public confidence in the system. It must be

remembered that woodpeckers inside pose a larger threat than the storm

outside.”

The apex Court in Daya Shankar vs. High Court of Allahabad11 has

held that “judicial officers cannot have two standards, one in the Court and

another outside the Court. They must have only one standard of rectitude,

honesty and integrity. They cannot act even remotely unworthy of the office

they occupy.”

The Supreme Court has cautioned against the plague of dishonesty

by observing that “dishonesty is the stark antithesis of judicial probity. Any

instance of a High Court condoning or compromising with a dishonest deed of

one of its officers would only be contributing to erosion of the judicial

foundation. Every hour we must remind ourselves that the judicial floats

only over the confidence of the people in its probity. Such confidence is the

foundation on which the pillars of the judiciary are built.”12

The confabulation on the topic of “Canons of Judicial Ethics,

6 S.C.J., Kadiri

Conduct, Character and Integrity of a Judicial Officer” cannot be concluded

without discussing the relationship between the bench and bar. In this

regard, the Supreme Court observed that “Administration of justice is not

something which concerns the Bench only. It concerns the Bar as well. Bar is

the principal ground for recruiting Judges. No one should be able to raise a

finger about the conduct of a lawyer.”13

The members of the Judiciary are drawn primarily and invariably

from the bar at different levels. The high moral, ethical and professional

standards among the members of the bar are preconditions even for high

ethical standards of the bench. Degeneration thereof inevitably has its

eruption and tends to reflect the other side of the coin.14

In the same thread, the High Court of Gujarath had an occasion to

discuss about the relations of bench and bar and held that “The Bar and

Bench play important role in the administration of justice. The Judges

administer the law with the assistance of the lawyers. The lawyers are

officers of the Court. Since the lawyers are officers of the Court, they are

required to maintain towards the Court respectful attitude bearing in mind

that the dignity of the judicial office is essential for the survival of the

society. During the presentation of the case and while acting otherwise

before the Court an advocate is required to conduct himself with dignity and

self−respect. He should not influence the decision of the Court by any illegal

or improper means. Besides, he is prohibited the private communication with

a Judge relating to a pending case. He should use his best effort to restrain

and prevent his client from resorting to unfair practices in relation to the

Court. An advocate should not consider himself a mere mouthpiece of the

client and should exercise his own judgment in the use of restrained

language in dealing with the Court. He should not use intemperate language

during arguments in the Court. He should avoid scurrilous attacks in

7 S.C.J., Kadiri

pleadings.”15

For the Judges of Subordinate Judiciary, it is imperative to adhere

to the above glaring lines of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the High Courts

for their day-to-day work in the career.

References

1. In re: Vinay Chandra Mishra AIR 1995 SC 2348

2. P.D.Gupta vs. Ram Murti AIR 1998 SC 283

3. Ravichandran Iyer vs. Justice A.M.Bhattachargee (1995) 5 SCC 457

4. Ibid at 3.

5. See Special Criminal Application vs. State of Gujarat, High Court of

Gujarat at Ahmedabad (date of disposal 10.12.2014)

6. Ibid at 3.

7. 1992 (5) JT 92

8. Ibid at 3.

9. K.P.Singh vs. High Court of H.P. & others in LPA No. 163 of 2009,

decided on 21.4.2011, by Division Bench of Hon'ble H.P. High Court. (per

Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J.)

10. (2005) 1 SCC 201

11. (1987) 3 SCC 1

12. High Court of Judicature vs. Shashikant Patel (2000) 1 SCC 416.

13. Ibid at 2

14. Ibid at 3

15. Ibid at 4

Sd/- Dr. S.Md.Fazululla,

Senior Civil Judge, Kadiri.

1

JUDGMENT WRITING IN GENERAL

The term “judgment” means the decision of a court giving finality to

the litigation or charge, on a question or questions on facts and law in

controversy between the parties. Judgment is an end product of judicial

exercise. “Judgment is the culmination of the action, declares the

existence of the right, recognises the commission of an injury or negatives

the allegation of one or the other” as observed in Gurdit Singh Vs. State

of Punjab (1974) 2 SCC 260. The court has to “right a Judgment which

must be inconformity with the provisions of Law and set out the reasoning

by which the controversy is resolved” as observed in Balarj Taneja Vs

Sunil Madan (1999) 8 SCC 396. The capacity, attitude and approach of

a Judicial Officer are seen through the judgment. The quality of judgment

is reflected in the proper perception of legal principles, method of analysis,

clarity and coherence of thought and use of fault-less language. There

must be constant endeavour on the part of the judicial officers‟, whose

judgment easily finds their way to the public and to the prosecuting

agencies, to right good judgments and subject themselves to a process of

self assessment on the basis of the judgment rendered by them.

2. The writing of a judgment is one of the most important tasks

performed by a Judge. The making and the writing of a judgment and the

style in which it is written, varies from Judge to Judge and reflects the

characteristic of a Judge. Every Judge, of every rank has his own distinct

style of writing. A judgment is distinct from a formal order as it gives

reasons for arriving at a conclusion. It is an „opinion‟ with the explanation,

given by a Judge for the order finally proposed or made.

3. RELAVANT PROVISIONS:- For civil cases, Judgment is

defined under Sec.2 (9) CPC 1908 as “The statement given by the judge

on the ground of a decree or order”. The “decree” in section 2 (2) means

formal expression of an adjudication, which, so far as regards the Court

2

expressing it, conclusively determination the rights of the parties with

regard to all or any of the matters in controversy in the suit and may be

either preliminary or final. In K.M. Krishnaiah Vs Tirumala Tirupathi

Devasthanam, 1997 (5) ALT 258 = 1997 (2) L.S. 362, it is held that

requirements of decree or an order to be satisfied to form a decision in civil

cases and mere caption of an order or decree and drawn up in the form of

decree is not sufficient. The “decree” under Section 2(14) is defined as

formal expression of any decision of a Civil Court, which is not a decree.

Section 33 of CPC says that 'the court, after the case has been heard, shall

pronounce Judgment, and on such Judgment a decree shall fallow. Order

XX of the Code, deals with “Judgment and Decree”. Rule 143 and Form

24 of Civil Rules of Practice prescribed the form of judgment.

4. For criminal matters, Chapter XXVII of the Code of Criminal

Procedure, 1973 provides for „the Judgment‟. Section 353 requires the

judgment in every trial to be pronounced in open Court immediately after

the termination of the trial, or at some subsequent time of which notice

shall be given to the parties or their pleaders. Section 355 provides for a

summary method of writing judgment by Metropolitan Magistrate, giving

only particulars regarding the case, name, parentage and residence of the

accused and complainant, the offence complained of or proved; plea of the

accused and his examination (if any); the final order and the date of order,

and where appeal lies, a brief statement of the reasons for the decision.

5. The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 and Code of Criminal

Procedure, 1973 have provided sufficient guidelines for writing judgment.

These, however, are not exhaustive. For better Judgment, Judicial Officers

must keep in mind the aspects (i) Pleadings (ii) Admitted and disputed

facts (iii) Issues /Charges (iv) Evidence both oral and documentary (v)

Arguments submitted by the counsel for both the parties (vi) Applicable

3

Law and (vii) Relevant case laws. A judgment in general contains 10

heads called 1.Heading 2.Introduction 3.Facts 4.Issues/Charges

5.Evidence 6.Arguments 7.Reasoning 8.Result/operative part 9.Appendix

10.Signature and date.

1. HEADING:- Every judgment whether it is Civil or Criminal

judgment contains the heading. The first line of the heading relates to the

actual nomenclature of the court deciding the issue. After the heading the

name of presiding Officer, who delivered the judgment, together with the

designation of the officer. After the name of the presiding officer, date of

the judgment in words as per English calendar should be mentioned.

After mentioning the dates of judgment mention the case number.

For example original suit as O.S, Sessions Case as S.C, Calendar case as

C.C. etc. Then the short cause title i.e., the names of all the parties. There

may not contain the father‟s name and the descriptive particulars of the

parties in short cause title unless two or three parties bear the same name

including surname. Then the names of the counsel appearing for both

parties and also mention the date of final hearing of the arguments, more

particularly the last date on which the arguments heard. It is purely

ministerial function and the stenographer attached to the court, types

these details.

2. INTRODUCTORY: The opening words of the judgment in civil

cases should show in a few lines the nature of the dispute, provision of law

and the relief sought. In criminal cases nature of offence and relevant

section of Law. The purpose is to tell anybody reading it, the outset what

the case is. The opening para thus should state in the briefest possible way

the theme and nature of the dispute that one is called upon to decide.

It is imperative that the presiding officer tells the reader or listener

right at the beginning what the case is all about; who the parties are; how

the case came before the officer and what are required to decide. If it is an

4

appeal against main case or I.A, an opposed aggrieved portion must be

mentioned be simple, crisp and succinct, but sufficiently inform the

reader/listener, introduction must always what the case is all about.

3. FACTS: A judgment must begin with clear recitals of facts of the

case basing on pleadings. The facts must come from the record and not

from the abstract and briefs. Narration must be without any colour to its

pleadings. Ordinarily a brief statement of fact is sufficient if it indicates the

context of the dispute/offence so that legal principle chosen for decision

can be understood. It is necessary to record substance of factual context

and the details of evidence placed before the Court. The Judge must prefer

to narrate the facts in greater detail distinguishing 1. What are facts?

2.What are relevant facts? 3.What are facts in issue? and 4.What are the

facts proved?

Traditionally facts constitute the most important part of the trial.

More often than not, cases are decided on the facts. In the trial court, the

facts are gleaned from the pleadings/complaints, oral and documentary

evidence. The facts may either be common cause or disputed. Where the

facts are disputed, can be determined while discussing the facts or may

leave them for later stage, to deal with the issues.

A reference to the pleadings is required only to the extent it is

necessary. The judge should, on a perusal of the pleadings, make out an

analytical summary of the respective cases setup by the parties. In

criminal cases the case of the prosecution mainly basing on the complaint

filed by defacto complaint and charge sheet must be narrated. It is a

settled law that pleadings are the foundation of the case on which the

entire judgment depends and one should not travel beyond the pleadings.

4. FORMATION OF ISSUES / CHARGES: . Issues arise when

material prepositions of facts or law is affirmed by the one party and

5

denied by the other. Issues/charges would play an important role as heart

to the judgment. The court must confine it‟s judgment, to the

pleadings/complaint and issues/ charges framed and should not enter

into the factual controversy beyond the pleadings and issues. In criminal

cases, charges framed by the Court lead to the trial. The judgment must

quote the issues/ charges, as the case may be immediately after the

narration of facts. Order XIV of CPC and Rule 106 of the A.P. Civil Rules

of practice deals with framing of issues. Section 228 and 240 of Cr,P.C

deal with framing of charges.

The formulation of issues/charges, should be initiated as early in

the proceedings as possible. Once the parties are clear in their mind about

the essential questions, they may shorten the proceedings. It also helps to

focus the mind of the judge on the precise matters to be determined. In a

civil matter it is merely a reproduction of the issues already framed. In Sri

Nanjundachari Vs Thee chairman , 1999 (2) ALT 14.1 (DNOHC), it is

held that it is mandatory on the part of the trial court to frame all

necessary issues arising from pleadings i.e. material proposition of fact

and law as affirmed by one party and denied by the other. The court shall

ordinarily pronounce judgment on all issues. But where any issue relates

to the jurisdiction of the court or a bar created by any Law for the time

being in force, the court may postpone main issues in controversy and

decide the pertaining issues first.

In criminal matters the court will frame the 'points for determination'

while dictating Judgment. In Velayudhan Vs. State of Kerala 1994 (1)

ALT (Crl.) 112, it is held that the Judgment shall contain points for

determination and reasons for decision on each point and each point

must be considered separately as far as possible. Care should be taken

that no material point on fact or law has been over- looked. The entire case

6

depends on the issues/charges. Our appreciation of evidence must always

be on issues/charges.

5. EVIDENCE:- Before deciding an issue or recording finding on a

charge, the relevant evidence must be discussed. Every Judge has his own

style of discussing the evidence. It is, however, always better to discuss the

evidence before giving an opinion to rely upon it. The judge must give the

details of the evidence led before it. However, only the relevant evidence

must be narrated and that too very briefly giving the purpose for such

evidence was led. The documents admitted in evidence after they are

proved on record must find their mention along with oral evidence by

which they were proved. A brief narration, however, will suffice if it is

precise and is clearly stated. Evidence is classified as direct evidence,

circumstantial and hear say evidence, real, and personal evidence, original

and unoriginal evidence etc.,

Evidence as defined under Sec.3 of the Evidence Act is of two kinds

oral and documentary. Oral evidence comprises all statements which the

court permits or required to be made before it by witnesses, in relation to

matter of fact under enquiry. Documents produced for the inspection of

the court are called documentary evidence. Document is again defined in

Sec.3 of the Evidence Act as Document means “any matter expressed or

described upon any substance by means of letters, figures or marks or by

more than one of those means, intended to be used or which may be used,

for the purpose of recording that matter”.

6. ARGUMENTS:- While dictating Judgment we have to keep in

mind the arguments made by learned counsel for both the parties. It is

the duty of the judge to receive the every offer of evidence. A judge has a

duty of his own, independent of them and that duty is to investigate and

find out the truth. A Judgment must briefly state the contentions of the

7

counsels on the points of determination. So far as possible all the

contentions raised by the counsels except those, which are wholly frivolous

must be mentioned on the record. After the Judge has met with all the

contentions he must record, that no other point was pressed.

The arguments of the counsel need not be reproduced verbatim or

in-extenso in the judgment. It is the duty of the judge to consider the

written arguments if any as a whole while dictating the judgment. The

judge has also to consider the case law so submitted basically with

reference to questions of law and incidentally with reference to facts also.

Once again the decisions relied upon by both sides as well as the leading

decisions and sort out the relevancy and decide for.

7. REASONING:- The soul of a judgment is the reasoning for

arriving at the findings. Reasoning is also called „the opinion‟ of a Judge.

There is no rigid rule, as to how a finding may be recorded. The Judge,

however, should give his reasons. The judge must be able to eliminate

chaff from the grain so that relevant and disputed facts and contentious

issues are brought out in the judgment leaving out the reference to

unnecessary and irrelevant matters. It is not sufficient to say that he

believes the evidence or agrees with the argument. The Judge must give

his reasons for such belief. An elaborate argument does not always require

elaborate answer.

In civil cases, one should decide only those material facts which are

alleged by the plaintiff and then state in another para the facts denied by

the defendant including specific defence raised by him. A Judge must be

able to summarize or reduce the principle laid down in that case to the

extent necessary and comment whether that principle has any application

or relevancy. The discussion part of the judgment should not be dominated

by mere narration of deposition of each and every witness. A reference to

8

irrelevant or unnecessary evidence for determination of the point under

discussion should be avoided. The reasoning and appreciation of evidence

should always be in connection with findings and result.

Absence of reasons makes the judgment appreciates not proper. The

reasons should be stated clearly for proper understanding. The reasoning

should be based on the evidence. In Bachan Singh's case (1980) 2 SCC

683, and in Des Raj Vs. State of Punjab 2007 (8) SCJ 237,a

Constitutional Bench while upholding the constitutional validity indicated

broad criteria which should guide the courts in the matter of sentencing,

and held that “ for making choice of punishment or for ascertaining the

existence or absence of special reasons in that context, the court must pay

due regard both to crime and criminal. A judgment is not expected to be

verbatim narration of the entire evidence. Reasoning is not expected to be

complete reproduction of the evidence. The evidence which is necessary for

determination of questions in controversy between the parties should be

discussed. There is no necessity to discuss the minute details which are

not necessary. All efforts shall be made to see that causes are decided

justly and litigations are terminated by expression of definitive and precise

opinions on the issues involved.

In the words of Hon‟ble Sri Justice Mukharji “The Supreme

requirement of a good Judgment is Reason. Judgment is of value on the

strength of it's Reasons. The weight of a Judgment is binding character

depends on the presentation and articulation of Reason. Therefore it is the

soul and spirit of a good Judgment”. The parties if possible or at least the

counsel-may be able to understand the manner in which their cases are

dealt with. There must be sufficient indication of our advertence to the

relevant points which arise for consideration and the reasons why we

decided the suit in a particular manner. We have to apply our mind to the

relevant considerations and it shall be capable of being understood by an

9

ordinary prudent man. Before, making observations on legal aspects, we

should know preliminarily what the relevant law is.

The primary purpose of reasoning for a verdict is to dispose of the

matter in controversy between the parties before it. A judge, however, is

not expected to drift away from pronouncing upon a controversy. It leads

to criticism and commenting thereon. The most importance part of the

judgment is the discussion of the each issue/points for determination and

pronouncement of clear positive finding. The finding should be based on

the sound reasoning. Major portion of the judgment must be the reasoning

on the evidence produced by both parties. The relief to be granted is largely

determined by the findings of law and fact. It can at times prove to be the

most difficult aspect of the case. Order XX Rule 5 CPC mandates that in

suits, the court shall state it‟s findings or decision, with the reasons

therefore, upon each separate issue.

A lengthy judgment containing copious reference to pleadings and

arguments without reasoning has no value. The reasons should be clearly

given and discussed while appreciating evidence to say that the trial court

applied its mind in delivering its verdict. Appreciation of evidence while

pronouncing the judgment plays an important role. It is very necessary to

give the specific reasons for the findings. While appreciating evidence one

should keep in mind not only the pleadings and evidence but also the

other material available on records i.e. connected matters, commissioner‟s

report, opinion of experts, interlocutory orders, third party affidavits etc.

Reasons given by a judge will reflect the working of his mind, his

approach, his grasping capacity on questions of fact and Law involved and

the depth of his knowledge. It is also necessary to keep in mind that after

reasoning on each issue/charge at the end, we have to disclose in whose

favour the particular issue/point is answered.

10

8. RESULT i.e., OPERATIVE PART:- The operative portion of the

judgment should be clear, specific and unambiguous. In civil cases, the

operative portion of the judgment shall contain recitals as to whether the

suit is decreed or dismissed and whether any cost is imposed or not. The

operative portion should contain the relief either given to the parties or not

given. It is not healthy practice to mention simply that the suit is decreed

as prayed for. It is very essential to mention clearly what is the relief given

to the parties and how it can be implemented. The period also be

mentioned for implementation of the decree if necessary in the operative

portion itself. For example in a suit for eviction if the suit is decreed we

have to mention the period within which the defendant has to deliver the

vacant possession to the plaintiff. In mortgage suits, the period of

redemption, there should be a finding with regards to costs also in the

operative portion. It should clearly be mentioned as to whether the suit is

decreed with costs or without costs.

In criminal matters, if the judgment is of acquittal it shall state the

offence of which the accused is acquitted and direct that he be set at

liberty. As provided in section 354 (3) Crpc in case of conviction for an

offence punishable with death or in the alternative with imprisonment for

life, the judgment has to state the reasons for sentence awarded and in the

case of sentence death special reasons for such sentence. In case of

conviction with imprisonment for a term of one year or more, a shorter

term of less than three months, also requires the Court to record reasons

for awarding such sentence, as stated in Section 354(4) Crpc.

The order to pay compensation where the Court imposes sentence or

fine; order of compensation for groundless arrest and the order to pay cost

in non-cognizable cases, may be made with the judgment under Sections

357, 358 and 359 of the Cr.P.C. Section 360 provides for order to release

on probation on recording, special reasons, in certain cases where the

11

Court applies with Probation of Offenders Act, 1958. When a court

imposes a sentence of fine, order the accused to pay such amount to the

person, who has suffered any loss or injury invoking section 357 (3) Crpc.

Operative part records the end result of the case. In a criminal case

it is the verdict. Care must be taken to ensure that the order is accurately

and correctly worded. The result must be clear and easy to understand. In

criminal matters after recording conviction, the Judge has an important

task of giving sentence, fine or compensation. The law requires the

accused to be heard before awarding sentence, which we call it as

Quantum of sentence or Question of sentence. The Judge must give

reasons for giving sentence, fine and apportion the compensation to the

victim for the sufferance, commensurate with severity of the offence. In

criminal matters where more than one offence is charged, the filing must

reveal as to whether the sentences run concurrently or consecutively. If

the accused under-gone any imprisonment, there should be an order for

set-off. In Shah Bahulal Khimji Vs. Hayben D. Kania (1981) 4 SCC 8,

it is held that the word Judgement has a concept of finality in a broader

sense and not in a narrower sense.

9. APPENDIX:- It is nothing but mentioning of the names of parties

and witnesses examined and their number. The appendix also contains

nomenclature of the documents and its number in detail. The portion

below signature of the judge in the judgment is known as appendix. The

appendix contains first, the names of the witnesses together with their

serial number as PW‟s (plaintiff‟s/prosecution witnesses), DW”s

(defendant‟s/defense witnesses) and CW”s (Court witnesses). There after

the documents seriatim relied upon by plaintiff‟s side as well as the

documents relied upon by the plaintiff‟s side as well as the documents

relied upon by the defendant‟s side are mentioned together with the

12

descriptive particulars including the dates of documents as Ex.A1, Ex.B.1

etc.

10. SIGNATURES & DATE :- Before noting the index Judge who

pronounces Judgement/order subscribe his/her signature. Each page of

the Judgement must also be signed by the judge. At the end of this list

contained in the appendix, the judge who pronounces judgment once again

makes his mark by either initialling the judgment or signing the same in

full. Order XX Rule 3 CPC mandates that cases the judgment shall be

dated and signed by the Judge in open court at the time of pronouncing it

and, when once signed shall not after words be allowed or added to, rare

as provided by sec.152 CPC or on relevancy. Judgment or the operative

part shall be signed and dated by presiding officer in open court and every

page of judgment shall be signed by him as prescribed under section

353(3) Cr.P.C. A copy shall be immediately made available for the perusal

of the parties or their pleaders on free of costs as per section 353(4) Cr.P.C.

In civil case copy of Judge and shall be made available for preferring an

appeal on payment of charges as provided Under Order XX Rule 6-B CPC.

This ends the usual contents of the judgment.

GENERAL OBSERVATIONS

1. LANGUAGE:- Plain and simple language has always been appreciated

in writing judgments. The language of the judgment is expected to be

easily understood. Brevity, simplicity and clarity are the hallmarks of the

good judgment. The greatest of these is clarity. Faulty language and wrong

construction of sentences should not occur in a judgment. If poor in power

of expression or in grammar, we should not hesitate to improve our

language. Section 354 of Crpc deal with the language and contents of

judgment. It is always advisable to select simple words and simple

sentences in drafting the judgment. It is the duty of the judge to see each

and every sentence of the judgment. If necessary to have a fresh copy. A

13

judgment full of typographical mistakes even if it is due to inefficiency or

negligence of the typist should not be allowed to remain as it is. It is the

duty of the judge to correct them on the draft copy and have a fresh copy

of the same.

It is always preferable to pronounce the judgment only after

dictation of entire judgment and after getting the fair copy of it. It is better

to avoid invidious examples, unnecessary quotations, and lecture. Short

sentences and para phrasing, head notes and subheading, wherever it is

necessary, is a recommended style of writing a judgment. The judgment

as provided in Section 354, is to be written in the language of the Court,

and shall contain the point or points for determination, the decision

thereon and the reasons for the decision. The judgment must be designed

and structured so that readers find their way through it, easily and

quickly. There is no such thing as good writing. It also ensures to avoid

silly mistakes. It is advisable to the Judges, to read their judgments after a

few years, to ensure that same mistakes are not repeated. There is always

a room for improvement. Even when it becomes necessary, try to express

in the language known to the reader.

The abbreviations should not be used in judgments. However, there

is an exception. Universally accepted abbreviations such as letters

indicating the degrees and the letters indicating the ranks of politicians

etc., are always permissible. However, the style of writing judgment namely

using simple language with clarity of mind both in writing legal principles

and conclusions, adds quality to the judgment. The language employed by

a Judge speaks of his character. A humble Judge with human personality

avoids using intemperate and unparliamentarily language.

2. APPLICATION OF THE LAW:- Referring the relevant provisions

of laws and reading of law journals would help, to improve quality of

14

Judgement writing. Once the issues have been delineated and identified,

one has to identify the law and legal principles that are applicable. It is not

necessary to quote the cases or material that, were researched. Only those

cases which are relevant and which support our decision needs to be

quoted and analysed. Remember that Judges are not writing a thesis or

displaying erudition. It is merely to support the decisions. The next step,

is how to apply the law to the facts. Whenever any question of law arises it

is the duty of the presiding officer to collect and follow the latest citations.

When the essential questions of law are clear, the way to decision becomes

easy. It is always helpful to quote the statute and the settled law, if it can

be found in authority, to proceed further with discussing the evidence.

In referring to case avoid practice of referring head note and foot

note, without reading full text. Read the entire case and make sure that it

is on point. Demonstrate to the reader/listener, how the case supports our

conclusion. In many cases, once the facts and the applicable law have

been decided, the answer becomes self-evident. Judgment must be fair,

reasonable and proper in line of the maxim “ubi jus, ibi referendum”.

The particular passages in the judgement which are relied upon

should be identified. If a judgement has been published in an authorised

report with consecutively numbered paragraphs, it should be referred to by

paragraph numbers rather than page numbers. Avoid citing authorities

which merely rephrase, illustrate or apply those principles or propositions

in a way which does not assist the court materially in resolving the real

matters in dispute. An unreported judgement should not usually be cited

unless it contains a statement of legal principle, or a material application

of principle, which is not found in reported authority. Reference of Head

Notes or Foot Notes from cited judgements in not healthy style. Simplicity

15

and clarity have always been the watch words for effective impressive

Judgment writing.

3. LINE AND LEGTH:- It is better to divide the judgment into

paragraphs of reasonable length. The judgement should not be too lengthy

containing big paragraphs. In civil matters, the judgements as the

requirement of law goes may be broadly classified into two categories,

namely, long and short judgements. In original suits, the final decision of a

case requires writing of a long and reasoned judgement. These includes

suits for permanent or prohibitory injunction; possession and manse

profit; specific performance of contract; cancellation of documents;

partition and possession; dissolution of firm and accounting; redemption

or foreclosure of mortgage etc. As compared to it, a Judge is required to

write short judgements, in the matter of interlocutory orders; summary

suits; preliminary issues; review; restoration; accepting compromise etc. It

is easier to write short judgment where legal issues are involved.

In sessions cases where more number of witnesses examined and

more number of documents & MO,s are marked, we can‟t escape from

dictating lengthy judgements. In such cases appreciation on each and

every aspect involved is necessary. Detailed reasoning to the finding is

preparable to avoid injustice. In State Vs. Nalini 1999 (2) ALT (Crl.) 1

SC, it is held that special reasons to be recorded to impose capital

punishment by explaining rarest of rare cases and by considering

aggravating as well as mitigating circumstances. Reputation should be

avoid and one should try to give the judgement as brief as possible. It is no

longer prudent to write a long and verbose judgement, with uncontrolled

expressions and citations.

4. PRECAUSIONS:- Take copious notes during the hearing the

arguments. At the end of the day‟s hearing, one must review the said notes

16

and familiarise with the case on an on-going basis as it is presented.

Study the documents involved in the case. Think about the

issues/charges involved keep the mind open and start formulating

provisional views on these issues/charges. Make notes of thinking about

the case as the trial progresses, including impressions of the witnesses.

Start writing with open mind. Clear thinking is the key to clear writing. If

there are legal points involved, devote as much time as to study the law.

Formulate in mind, the legal principles applicable to the case, citing

relevant authority. This formulation, modified from time to time as the

evidence unfolds the judgement is an end product of judicial exercise.

5. STYLE OF SCRIBING:--There is a wide discretion left with the Judges

to choose their style of writing, language, manner of statement of facts,

discussion of evidence and reasons for the decision. The backlog of cases

has put a great pressure on the Judges. The pressure of work and stress

on most of the Judges today, demands improving skills in writing

judgement, which are brief, simple, and clear without compromising with

the quality. Good editing ensures that a judgement is lucid, thorough,

coherent, concise and has a transparent reasoning.

The choice of style is very personal. We have to scribe the judgement in

a way, which is easy for the reader to understand. People, particularly

lawyers express themselves in different ways. The judgment writing

consumes the major part of Judge‟s work. The Judges by their experience,

find methods of style to reduce this burden, by writing brief opinions. The

judgment, however should serve the requirement of law without

compromising with the quality.

The lawyers who are thorough with the law and the lawyers who

are absolutely new to law will appear in our courts. The senior lawyer who

is well equipped and well-versed in law may guide properly and may not,

17

depending on the quality of the counsel. A lawyer who has been at the Bar

for a short period may not be equipped to provide sufficient guidance. We

have to adopt our own style of receiving the submissions, basing on our

own knowledge and experience. The style of judicial writing is constantly

changing. We must start scribing the Judgments only after reaching

decision to our mind first. Never attempt writing of judgment before that.

Style of writing judgment without knowing what we are going to say, is not

healthy practice.

6. PURPORT::-- Judgments are written mainly for the benefit of the

parties. It is also written for benefit of legal profession. The losing party is

the primary focus of concern. The winner is not much interested in the

reasons for success, as he is convinced of the righteousness of the cause.

The looser, however, in the expensive litigation is entitled to have a candid

explanation of the reasons for the decision. It is not only for exercise of

any appellate right but also to uphold the intellectual integrity of the

system of law, impartiality and logical reasoning. The lawyer is interested

in the judgment as he understands the analysis and expositions of legal

precedents and principles. The lawyers also examine the judgments for

learning they provide, and for the reassurance of the quality of judiciary.

They can easily find out errors in fact finding.

The judge is also aware that his decision may be reported and that

it may establish a legal principle, binding, until it is set aside by the

appellate Court. The best Judges perform their reasoning opinion honestly

to the best of their ability without undue concern that the appellate Court

may find error or reach a different conclusion.

The judgment is also a reflection of the conscience of a Judge, who

writes it, and evidences his Impartiality, Integrity and Intellectual honesty.

The judgment writing is an opportunity to judicial officers to demonstrate

18

their own ability and. The judge should be able to eliminate the chaff from

the grain. It is essential that the judgment shall be just and also appear to

be just.

JUDICIAL ETHICS

The word ethics is derived from the Greek word ethos, which means

"character," and from the Latin word mores, which means "customs."

Aristotle was one of the first great philosophers to study ethics. To him,

ethics was more than a moral, religious, or legal concept. He believed that

the most important element in ethical behavior is knowledge that actions

are accomplished for the betterment of the common good. He asked

whether actions performed by individuals or groups are good both for an

individual or a group and for society. To determine what is ethically good

for the individual and for society, Aristotle said, it is necessary to possess

three virtues of practical wisdom: temperance, courage, and justice.

2. Judges must comply with the Code of Judicial Conduct, which

was formulated by the ABA in 1972. This code is not considered law. The

restatement of values of judicial life was a charter adopted by Hon'ble S.C

in its full bench in 1997 with the objective of serving a guide of judicial

conduct for judges. This charter called “Restatement of Values of Judicial

Life” was also ratified and adopted by Indian Judiciary in the Chief

Justices Conference in 1999. At the international level, principles of

judicial conduct were approved and adopted in November, 2002 in Round-

Table Meeting of Chief Justices from several law systems held in Peace

Palace in Haque, Netherlands. Cannons of Judicial Ethics are unlimited. I

would like to present some of the important cannons of judicial ethics.

1. Integrity and Honesty,

2. A Judge should up hold independence of the judiciary

3. A Judge should perform the duties of the office fairly and diligently

19

4. Divine duty to hold the office of public trust

5. Conduct and Character

6. Administration of Justice

7. A judge should be punctual and regular,

8. Restraint and Discipline,

9. Potentiality and Impropriety and

10. A judge should not engage in extra judicial activities.

3. Every judicial officer should possess sterling quality of

integrity. Integrity according to Oxford dictionary is moral uprightness;

honesty. Integrity is the hall mark of judicial discipline apart from others

as reminded by the Hon'ble Apex court in Tarak Shingh Vs Jvoti Basu

(2005) 1 SCC 201. Their honesty and integrity is expected to be beyond

doubt. In Daya Shankar Vs High Court of Allahabad, (1987) 3 SCC 1,

The Hon'ble Supreme Court set the following standard:

“Judicial officers cannot have two standards one in the court and

another outside the court. They must have only one standard of rectitude,

honesty and integrity. They cannot act even remotely unworthy of the office

they occupy”. In High Court of Judicature at Bombay Vs Shashikant

S. Patil (2000) 1 SCC 416, it is observed that dishonesty in the antithesis

of judicial probity and “a dishonest judicial personage is an Oxymon”.

In Registrar General Patna High Court Vs Pandev Gajendra

Prasad 2012 STPL (web) 305, it is observed that “there is no gainsaying

that while it is imperative for the High court to protect honest and upright

judicial officers against motivated and concocted allegations and it is

equally necessary for the High Court not to ignore or condone any

dishonest deed on the part of any judicial officer. It needs little emphasis

that the sub-ordinate judiciary is the king pin in the hierarchical system of

administration of justice.

20

4. In Rajendra Singh Verma (Dead) through LRs VS

Leiutenant Governor (NCT of Delhi), 2011 10 SCC 1 it, held “when

integrity and honesty of Judicial officer is doubt full, the judicial review

should be made only with great care and circumspection and must be

confined strictly to the parameters set by the Supreme Court in several

reported decisions.

5. Judiciary should take utmost care to see that the Temple of

Justice does not crack from inside which will damage the justice delivery

system.. The integrity and independence of judges depend in turn on their

acting without fear or favor. Although judges should be independent, they

must comply with the law and should comply with this Code. This helps to

maintain public confidence in the impartiality of the judiciary. Violation of

this cannon diminishes public confidence in the judiciary and injures our

system of law. The courts are independent subject to the Constitution and

the law, which they must apply impartially and without fear, favour or

prejudice. No person or organ of state may interfere with the functioning of

the courts. Organs of state, through legislative and other measures, must

assist and protect the courts to ensure the independence, impartiality,

dignity, accessibility and effectiveness of the courts. The concept of

independence of Judiciary was the cause of concern of the Supreme Court

in the case of S.P. Gupta Vs. Union of India [1981 (Suppl.) SCC 87], and

the Court observed thus: -

“The concept of independence of the judiciary is a noble concept

which inspires the constitutional scheme and constitutes the foundation

on which rests the edifice of our democratic polity. If there is one principle

which runs through the entire fabric of the Constitution, it is the principle

of the Rule of Law and under the Constitution, it is the judiciary which is

entrusted with the task of keeping every organ of the State within the

21

limits of the law and thereby making the Rule of Law meaningful and

effective”.

6. The duties of judicial office take precedence over all other

activities. In performing the duties prescribed by law, the judge should

adhere to the following standards. A judge should be faithful to and

maintain professional competence in the law. A judge should hear and

decide matters assigned and should maintain order and decorum in all

judicial proceedings. A judge should be patient, dignified, respectful, and

courteous to litigants, jurors, witnesses, lawyers, and others with whom

the judge deals in an official capacity. A judge should require similar

conduct of those subject to the judge‟s control, including lawyers to the

extent consistent with their role in the adversary process. A judge should

accord to every person who has a legal interest in a proceeding. A judge

should not initiate, permit or consider ex- parte communications or

consider other communications concerning a pending or impending matter

that are made outside the presence of the parties or their lawyers.

7. The Judges thus are a privileged class and vested with

duties of great responsibility, holding offices of public trust. The duty of a

judge is a divine duty. The concept of rule of law is dependent on an

independent, fair and competent judiciary since judges are, to borrow

words from preamble of model code of judicial conduct adopted by

American Bar Association in 1990 “ arbiters of facts and law for the

resolution of disputes and a highly visible symbol of Government under

rule of law”.

8. There are certain cardinal principles of judicial ethics that

apply to any person holding a judicial office whether at the level of sub-

ordinate judiciary or in the High Court of the land, 1.Concerning to the

acts attributable to his official functions as a Judge, 2.Concerning his

22

conduct while in public glare, 3.The expectations of his during his private

life. His personal whims or caprice (action) can have no role to play in the

discharge of his official duties. His job is to here the parties in the open

court. Court's functioning under the public glare is based on “the principle

of transparency” to gain faith and confidence of the public in the system.

Therefore, it is a sacred duty of every judge to discharge his functions in

open court judicial service is not a service in the sense of an employment.

They are entrusted with divine duty in the office of public trust.

9. Judges are bestowed with the responsibility of judging the

conduct of fellow citizens. Therefore, it is natural that they be expected to

make truthful decisions in their own lives. If they succumb to making the

wrong choices, they lose the moral authority to judge the lives of others.

Judges are not only responsible for their own conduct but also for the

conduct of their own family. They have to sacrifice some of their freedoms

that they may have otherwise enjoyed.

10. A judge should maintain and enforce high standards of

conduct and should personally observe those standards, so that the

integrity and independence of the judiciary may be preserved. Self-

evidently, judicial officers have an obligation to perform their adjudicative

functions honestly, conscientiously and to the best of their abilities

without any undue influence, fear, prejudice or bias with the full

appreciation of the impact which their judgements have on society in

general. A judge needs to update himself with not only the changes in law

but also constantly keep abreast with judicial ethics. Judicial officers must

remember that they are the part of the institution and their individual

actions could have a bearing on the entire institution. In the public

perception a single wrongful act committed by a judge could often annul

much of the credibility upheld by the judiciary. The principles of ethics

23

that is the conduct of an ideal Judge arisen out of what is a legitimate well-

entrenched right of the people for whom the judicial institution has been

created. The rules of ethics are nothing but a corresponding sacred duty

on the part of judges to live up to those expectations.

11. A judge administers justice. In order to do justice, the first

and foremost expectation of him is to be just. In order to be just, he has to

be morally right, fair and impartial to all concerned. He cannot have any

predisposed state of mind. He has to be merciful and decisive. Judge has

to be upright and resolute. A fair judge will always be consistent in his

approach to the appreciation of facts and application of law to the facts

found proved before him. Inconsistencies in the judgment of an individual

bring bad name to the system.

12. It is age old principle “delayed justice is denied justice”.

Indian judicial system is facing the challenge of huge pendency. It is not so

easy to render quick justice. There is a need to expedite the wheels of

justice in every case and in each minute. A judge should not make public

comment on the merits of a matter pending or impending in any court. A

judge should require similar restraint by court personnel subject to the

judge‟s direction and control. The prohibition on public comment on the

merits does not extend to public statements made in the course of the

judge‟s official duties, to explanations of court procedures, or to scholarly

presentations made for purposes of legal education.

13. A judge should diligently discharge administrative

responsibilities, maintain professional competence in judicial

administration, and facilitate the performance of the administrative

responsibilities of other judges and court personnel. Excellence in Bench –

Bar relationship requires constant relation on both sides that both are the

institutions essential to the administration to the justice. Mutual respect

24

for and recognition of each other‟s role is essential for a healthy

harmonious relationship. A Judge cannot indulge, in or outside his court,

in such behaviour, which can create doubts about the credibility of his

character. Then only he would be able to command respect. The duty

remain within the bounds of morality is not only restricted to the Judge

himself but also to his family members. A scandalous behaviour on the

part of the Judge, even in his private affairs is bound to affect the image

and prestige of his office.

14. A Judge remains a judge 24 hours a day, 7 days a week and

365 days a year. A Judge thinks about the cases deeply, even while

sleeping. A judge should not sit idle and ensure that he/she has requisite

number of cases lined up before him/her so as to remain preoccupied

throughout the normal working hours. Be conscious while calling the

witnesses on a particular day to avoid overburden and to avoid calling the

witnesses again and again. A judge has to be available and accessible to

the people at large who are expected to invoke his jurisdiction for redressal

of their grievances. He has to be punctual and regular in adhering to the

court hours. It is the duty of a judge to check indiscipline amongst those

who are expected to play role in smooth functioning of court. The need for

punctuality and regularity of a judge is not only for better judicial work

but for the improvement in functioning of court, as a whole including

staff, members of the Bar, the litigant, witnesses etc,. Repeatedly our

Hon'ble High Court issuing circulars reminding the officers to hold the

bench from 10.30 am to 5.00 pm by posting sufficient matters to conduct

proceedings on Bench with a specific direction to have the lunch in

chambers carrying lunch boxes.

15. There are the most important attributes of an ideal judge and

such a judge would maintain dignity and decorum in his court, would not

25

indulge in loose talk, would refrain from unnecessary utterances and

would keep his temper in check. A judge would always be polite and

peaceful. We determine the rights of the parties to a lis. In the words of

SOCRATES four things the judge has to do, 1.To hear courteously, 2.To

proceed wisely, 3.To consider soberly, 4.To decide impartially. Judges are

mere agents of superior power that empowers us to do justice for the

people in need of help. His judgment would be dispassionate. He would not

be identified with cause of a particular section of society. He would refrain

from socializing unnecessarily, not only with the persons having official

work in his court but also generally with the society at large, since there is

no guarantee who will come before him. Coming to the allurements, a

judge must train himself in the beginning of his judicial career not to fall

prey to offers valuable gifts in cash, kind or service from members of

general public. A judge should not act as a leader or hold any office in a

political organization. He should not attend to make speeches for a

political organization or candidate, or publicly endorse or to oppose a

candidate for public office. He should not solicit funds as contribution to a

political organization or candidate, or attend or purchase a ticket for a

dinner or other event sponsored by a political organization or by candidate.

16. In order to assess potentiality obviously, the entire

record of service, character rolls, quality of judgments and other relevant

circumstances like general reputation, integrity, efficiency, performance,

conduct etc. do form the basis. Doubtful integrity and suspicious judicial

conduct are sufficient to deny a judicial officer to get benefit of

enhancement of superannuation age. It is in totality of the circumstances

available from the entire service record and all other relevant

circumstances that an opinion has to be formed whether or not the

Judicial Officer deserves to be given benefit of increase of superannuation

age.

26

17. A judge should respect and comply with the law and should

act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in

impartiality of the judiciary. A judge should not allow family, social,

political, financial, or other relationships to influence judicial conduct or

judgment. A judge should neither lend the prestige of the judicial office to

advance the private interests of the judge or others nor convey or permit

others to convey the impression that they are in a special position to

influence the judge. A judge should not testify voluntarily as a character

witness.

18. A judge may engage in extra judicial activities, including law-

related pursuits and civic, charitable, educational, religious, social,

financial, fiduciary, and governmental activities, and may speak, write,

lecture, and teach on both law-related and non legal subjects. However, a

judge should not participate in extra judicial activities that detract from

the dignity of the judge‟s office, interfere with the performance of the

judge‟s official duties, reflect adversely on the judge‟s impartiality, lead to

frequent disqualification, or violate the limitations set forth below. A

Judge should not engage in extra judicial activities, which are inconsistent

with the legal obligations and giving scope to doubt the judicial functions.

I conclude this presentation with the few valuable words of Hon‟ble

Dr.A.P.J. ABDUL KALAM former President of India spoken, at NJA Bhopal

as “The Judiciary in India has become the last refuge for the people and

the future of the country will depend upon the fulfilment of the high

expectations reposed by the people in it”.

I hope and trust that this presentation may serve the innovative

idea of conducting workshops to some extent to enable the judicial officers

to discharge their functions confidently and efficiently, maintaining high

degree of rectitude. I deem it a matter of pride, privilege and pleasure for

27

having been asked to submit the presentation on the precious topic, for

which my honoured thanks to the Hon‟ble High Court of Judicature at

Hyderabad for the States of Andhra Pradesh and Telangana.

Thank You.

By

Smt. Shammi Parvin Sulthana Begum, B.Sc.,B.L.,L.LM.,

Senior Civil Judge,

Dharmavaram.

References:-

1. Material supplied by NJA & APJA.

2. Lecture delivered by Hon'ble Sri J.T.S. Sivagnanam on on 11.4.2010 at Tamil Nadu state judicial Academy.

3. Speech delivered by Hon‟ble Sri Justice Sunil Ambwani, Judge, Allahabad, High Court

4. Observations in K.P.Singh Vs High Court of H.P & others.

5. Speech delivered by Hon‟ble Sri Justice Y.K.Sabharwal CJ I at 1st MC Setalvad Memorial Lectures Series.

6. Speech delivered by Hon'ble Sri Justice R.C.Lohoti C J I at First Nani A.Palkhivale memorial lecture on 16-1-2004.

7. Article of Hon‟ble Sri Justice Maniram Sharma, Chief Justice of India.