Judge with Bad Reputation Cannot Remain in Judicial Office, Supreme Court Rules

The Supreme Court has ruled that judge dismissal is the appropriate punishment when a judge’s bad reputation is established, stating that a judicial officer who has lost public trust cannot continue to hold office. The remarks were made in a verdict related to an Additional Sessions Judge posted in Mailsi.

The nine-page judgment was authored by Justice Shahid Waheed, while Justice Naeem Akhtar and Justice Shafi Siddiqui were also members of the three-judge bench that heard the case.

The Supreme Court set aside the decision of the Service Tribunal and restored the dismissal order previously issued by the High Court. The court observed that the original punishment was lawful and should remain in effect.

Also Read: PSX drops over 2,800 points as market sentiment weakens

The court also rejected both petitions seeking the reinstatement of the judicial officer and the removal of adverse remarks from his record. According to the ruling, even though bribery allegations were not proven, a judge with a damaged reputation cannot continue serving in the judiciary. The court further stated that compulsory retirement is not an appropriate penalty in such cases and that dismissal is the proper course of action. It added that the tribunal had misinterpreted the law by converting the dismissal into compulsory retirement.

The judgment emphasized that a judge cannot remain in office once public confidence in the judiciary is undermined. The court remarked that judicial integrity cannot be divided—it is either complete or absent. It further noted that removing a judge with a bad reputation is comparable to removing a harmful disease from the body, making judge dismissal necessary to protect the credibility and integrity of the judicial system.