Sikkim High Court Suspends Prajwal Khatiwada Over Misconduct Allegations

• Prajwal Khatiwada, District and Sessions Judge at Mangan, has been suspended by the Sikkim High Court.
• The suspension, effective November 4, was based on unsatisfactory explanations to show-cause notices and concerns for justice administration.
• Allegations against Khatiwada include unauthorized promotions and appointments as Registrar General, leading to an estimated ₹1.64 crore financial loss.
• He also faced accusations regarding a vigilance inquiry and failure to submit his Annual Confidential Report.
• Weeks prior, Khatiwada had approached the Supreme Court, claiming he was targeted for complaining against a High Court judge.

The Full Court explicitly dismissed Khatiwada's defense that some of his actions had received higher approval, asserting that such endorsements do not absolve a judicial officer of their individual responsibility.

Prajwal Khatiwada, the District and Sessions Judge for Mangan, has been placed under immediate suspension by the Sikkim High Court. This action, formalized by an order dated November 4, stems from a decision made by the High Court's Full Court, which determined that his continued presence in office was not conducive to the proper administration of justice. The suspension will remain in effect pending the outcome of disciplinary proceedings and until further directives are issued.

The Full Court arrived at this decision after reviewing Khatiwada's responses to two separate show-cause notices, finding his explanations unsatisfactory on a prima facie basis. While the suspension order itself does not reference a prior complaint Khatiwada made against a sitting High Court judge, nor a subsequent petition he filed with the Supreme Court, these actions had occurred weeks before his suspension. In his Supreme Court petition, Khatiwada had alleged that he was being targeted following his complaint.

The grounds for Khatiwada's suspension encompass a range of serious allegations, primarily concerning his tenure as Registrar General. During this period, he is accused of having implemented promotions and upgradations without adequate legal or administrative justification. Furthermore, he allegedly made appointments that contravened established rules and procedures. These actions are estimated to have resulted in a financial loss of approximately ₹1.64 crore.

The Full Court explicitly dismissed Khatiwada's defense that some of his actions had received higher approval, asserting that such endorsements do not absolve a judicial officer of their individual responsibility. Additional allegations contributing to the disciplinary action include a communication from August 6, which raised questions about the methodology used for examining witnesses in a vigilance inquiry. Moreover, Khatiwada failed to submit his Annual Confidential Report despite receiving multiple directives to do so, and there are broader allegations of conduct deemed unbecoming of a judicial officer.

This development underscores the rigorous disciplinary framework governing judicial officers in India, emphasizing the high standards of conduct expected from those entrusted with administering justice. The decision by the Sikkim High Court's Full Court to suspend a District Judge, particularly while disciplinary proceedings are ongoing, highlights the judiciary's commitment to maintaining integrity and accountability within its ranks.

The process, which involves issuing show-cause notices and evaluating responses, demonstrates a structured approach to addressing concerns about judicial conduct. The explicit rejection of the defense of "higher approval" reinforces the principle of individual accountability for judicial officers, regardless of potential external endorsements. This case serves as a significant example of the judiciary's internal mechanisms for addressing alleged misconduct, ensuring public trust in the administration of justice.

This development highlights the stringent disciplinary processes for judicial officers in India, particularly when allegations of administrative misconduct or complaints against superior judges arise. Lawyers should note the potential for disciplinary action against judges, which can impact judicial appointments and the administration of justice, and underscores the high standards of conduct expected from judicial officers.

Source: Original reporting via legal news outlet.