13 Sitting Allahabad HC Judges Urge CJ To Convene Full Court Against SC Order Stripping HC Judge Of Criminal Roster
In a strong and unprecedented move, at least 13 judges of the Allahabad High Court have written to the Chief Justice of the HC urging him to convene a Full Court to consider not giving effect to certain directions issued by the Supreme Court in its August 4 order taking away Justice Prashant Kumar’s criminal roster until his retirement.
The letter seeks consideration of the following resolution:
“The Full Court resolves that directions made in paragraphs 24 to 26 in subject order dated 4th August, 2025 is not to be complied with as the Supreme Court does not have administrative superintendence over the High Courts. Furthermore, the Full Court records its anguish in respect of tone and tenor of said order“.
It may be noted that the Supreme Court had harshly criticised an order passed by Justice Kumar and further directed the High Court Chief Justice to make him sit with a senior judge in a division bench. Further, the Court observed that no criminal matters should be allotted to the High Court Judge.
In the letter dated August 7, 2025Justice Arindam Sinha, writing in his individual capacity, circulated the letter for support under Chapter III, Rule 9 of the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952which has been signed by at least 12 other judges of the HC.
The letter highlights that the Supreme Court made scathing remarks about Justice Kumar without issuing notice or giving him an opportunity to defend himself.
The letter adds that such observations violate principles laid down by the Supreme Court itself in Amar Pal Singh v. State of U.P. 2012, wherein it was emphasized that higher courts must exercise restraint when commenting on judicial officers who are not present to defend themselves:
“Subject order dated 4th August, 2025 was made without direction for issuance of notice and contains scathing remarks on apparently baseless findings against the learned Judge”the letter states.
The letter defends Justice Kumar’s order, stating that it relied upon the Supreme Court rulings in Lee Kun Hee v. State of U.P. and Syed Askari Hadi Ali Augustine Imam v. State (Delhi Administration). It adds that Justice Kumar’s order “was not perverse, nor without precedent” and thus should not have attracted such a harsh judicial response.
Our readers may note that the Supreme Court’s order had come under criticism that it was an overreach of judicial powers and an interference with the roster powers of the High Court Chief Justice.
Interestingly, earlier today, it was noted that the Supreme Court will be rehearing this case tomorrow. The matter, which was disposed of by the harsh order passed on August 4, was today seen as re-listed for tomorrow before the bench comprising Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice R Mahadevan.
The matter is listed under the head “Direction Matters” tomorrow. The status of the case is now being shown as “pending” on the Supreme Court’s website.
To recap, on August 4, a bench comprising Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice R Mahadevan took exception to an order passed by Justice Kumar of the Allahabad High Court by which a criminal complaint was refused to be quashed by saying that the civil suit remedy to recover the money was not effective.
“The judge concerned has not only cut a sorry figure for himself but has made a mockery of justice. We are at our wits’ end” to understand what is wrong with the Indian Judiciary at the level of High Court. At times we are left wondering whether such orders are passed on some extraneous considerations or it is sheer ignorance of law. Whatever it be, passing of such absurd and erroneous orders is something unpardonable,” the top court had noted.