By IANS
New Delhi : Irked over a wrong judgement given by a sessions judge, the Delhi High Court Friday directed him to undergo training for three months at the Delhi Judicial Academy to gain basic knowledge of law and its procedures.
The judge had ordered the arrest of a person whose tenant had been charged with theft of power.
Justice V.B. Gupta of the Delhi High Court said: “Since Mr. R.K. Tewari, Additional Session Judge, does not have even elementary knowledge of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), under these circumstances, it would be appropriate if he undergoes a refresher course at the Delhi Judicial Academy in criminal law and procedure for three months.
“Director, Delhi Judicial Academy, should submit to this court the performance report with regard to this judicial officer,” said Justice Gupta’s order, which will be given to all subordinate court judges for reference.
Justice Gupta said: “The observations made by the subordinate judge in his order dated Sep 19, 2007, are per se disobedience of the order passed by the high court and amounts to contempt of court.”
He said that despite the restraint and pendency of bail on accused Rohit Kumar before the high court, the trial court issued a warrant of arrest under section 82 of the CrPC (meant for absconders) and got him arrested.
“There must be a report before the magistrate that the person against whom he had issued a warrant had absconded or had been concealing himself so that such warrant can be issued. An attachment warrant can be issued only after the issuance of proclamation under Section 82 of the CrPC,” the court said.
According to the petition, Rohit Kumar has a house and had rented it out to one Dubey. As the house did not have power connection Dubey was illegally using power through a cable connected to the electric pole.
He was caught and booked for theft of power. However, when the case came up before the court headed by R.K. Tewari, the private power supplier pleaded for proceeding against Rohit Kumar as he was the owner of the house.
He was arrested though he should not have been proceeded against under the Sections 82 and 83 of the CrPC which is for absconders, said Advocate Tanvir Ahmed Mir, appearing for Rohit.
Rohit had challenged in the high court the Sep 19 order of the trial court, and had applied for bail. But despite it the trial ordered his arrest.