Supreme Court says judges with tainted reputation cannot remain on bench

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court ruled on Friday that a judge with a tainted reputation cannot remain on the bench, saying that judicial integrity is non-negotiable and even the absence of direct bribery proof does not justify retaining compromised officials.

The three-member bench, comprising Justice Shahid Waheed, Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan, and Justice Shafi Siddiqui, issued the landmark decision while setting aside a service tribunal’s order that had soften the dismissal of a lower-court judge.

With the ruling, the apex court restored the original termination order issued by the Lahore High Court against an Additional District and Sessions Judge previously stationed in Mailsi.

In the nine-page judgment, Justice Shahid Waheed emphasised that a judge’s reputation must remain entirely above suspicion to protect the public’s faith in the administration of justice.

"A judge’s integrity cannot be partitioned; it is either absolute or it does not exist at all," the court ruled.

"Allowing a judge with a persistent reputation for corruption to exit with retirement benefits sends a dangerous signal that integrity is negotiable. Removing such an official is akin to excising a tumor from the body of the judiciary."

The apex court noted that the judiciary derives its strength from public trust rather than raw authority, warning that the legal system collapses the moment citizens lose faith in the impartiality and character of those presiding over the courts.

Investigation and Lower Actions

The case stems from multiple public complaints filed against the judicial officer, accusing him that he accepted bribes in exchange for favourable court verdicts.

Rather than taking immediate disciplinary action, the Lahore High Court initially placed the judge under special surveillance.

Subsequent quarterly intelligence and performance reports consistently rated his professional reputation as poor, prompting a formal departmental inquiry into corruption, maladministration, and general misconduct.

While the inquiry committee found insufficient concrete evidence to conclusively prove the direct receipt of bribes, it ruled that the allegations of a corrupt reputation and compromised integrity were fully substantiated. Based on those findings, the departmental authority dismissed the officer from service.

Overturning the Service Tribunal

The judge subsequently appealed to the Punjab Subordinate Judiciary Service Tribunal, which misconstrued the law by modifying the dismissal into a softer penalty of compulsory retirement, effectively preserving his post-service benefits.

The Supreme Court rejected that mitigation, describing the tribunal's leniency as legally flawed. The bench ruled that when a persistent bad reputation is proven during a departmental inquiry, dismissal — not compulsory retirement — is the only appropriate administrative response.

The apex court dismissed both petitions filed by the judicial officer, which sought reinstatement and the expungement of adverse remarks from his file, declaring that the judicial institution demands not just actual honesty, but the undeniable perception of it.

The post Supreme Court says judges with tainted reputation cannot remain on bench appeared first on HUM News English.