Prayagraj: The Allahabad High Court has taken a strong view of an alleged attempt by IAS officer Durga Shakti Nagpal, Commissioner of the Devipatan Division, to influence judicial proceedings in a decades-old land dispute case from Gonda.
The matter came before the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court, where Justice Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi expressed serious concern over an alleged phone conversation between Nagpal and Civil Judge (Senior Division) Shabina Khan. According to the report placed before the court, the communication allegedly involved an attempt to influence the judicial process.
The controversy relates to a land dispute dating back to 1997. Judge Shabina Khan reportedly brought the alleged interaction to the notice of the District Judge, following which the case was transferred.
During the hearing, the High Court stressed that judicial officers must be able to discharge their duties independently and without pressure from executive authorities or litigating parties.
Court flags concern over judicial independence
The High Court reportedly observed that direct communication with a judicial officer by a party connected with litigation was deeply concerning. It noted that the language and manner of the conversation, as reported by Judge Khan, indicated an apparent attempt to influence the proceedings.
The court underlined that protecting the independence of subordinate courts is essential to maintaining the rule of law and public confidence in the justice system.
The bench also referred to earlier Supreme Court judgments concerning attempts to exert pressure on judicial officers. It observed that any effort to intimidate, influence or otherwise interfere with a judge’s functioning can amount to an obstruction of the administration of justice.
Matter referred for consideration of criminal contempt
Taking the allegations seriously, the High Court directed that the matter be placed before a bench dealing with criminal contempt for consideration.
The court’s decision highlights the seriousness with which alleged interference in judicial proceedings is viewed, particularly when it involves a senior public official and a subordinate judicial officer.
The proceedings also emphasised that presiding officers must be allowed to function without fear, favour or external pressure. The court made it clear that administrative authority cannot be used to interfere with the judicial decision-making process.
The allegations against Nagpal remain subject to further judicial consideration. The referral to the criminal contempt bench is expected to determine the legal implications of the reported interaction and whether the conduct amounts to contempt of court.
The development has drawn attention to the delicate relationship between the executive and judiciary and once again underscored the principle that judicial decisions must be made independently, without influence from powerful individuals or public authorities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
