MP High Court Steps In After Judge Tabassum Khan Receives Death Threats Over Lynching Verdict
Court says judges cannot be intimidated; seeks explanation from top police and Home Department officials
JABALPUR: In a significant move to protect judicial independence, the Madhya Pradesh High Court has taken suo motu cognizance of alleged death threats and an online hate campaign against Additional District and Sessions Judge Tabassum Khan, who recently sentenced 14 men to life imprisonment in a high-profile lynching case.
A Division Bench comprising Justice Vivek Agarwal and Justice Avanindra Kumar Singh observed that judges cannot be threatened for delivering judicial orders and directed the state's top police and Home Department officials to explain what action has been taken against those responsible for creating an atmosphere of fear around the judicial officer.
The court was hearing an ongoing suo motu matter concerning the safety and welfare of judicial officers in Madhya Pradesh when the issue was brought to its notice through media reports and submissions by counsel representing the High Court.
Threats after lynching verdict
Judge Tabassum Khan had convicted 14 accused in the August 2022 lynching of Sheikh Lala Nazir Ahmad, a truck driver from Maharashtra's Amravati district, who was allegedly attacked on suspicion of cattle smuggling. Besides murder, the accused were also convicted of armed rioting and attempt to murder after two of Ahmad's companions survived the assault.
Following the verdict, the judge reportedly became the target of abusive social media posts, communal remarks and explicit threats. One social media user allegedly threatened a "massacre" if the convicted men were not released, while another campaign accused the judge of delivering the verdict on religious grounds. An X account reportedly called upon people to "drive Judge Khan out of the country" before the post was deleted. Protesters also reportedly burnt an effigy of the judge.
The incidents prompted registration of an FIR and enhancement of security for the judicial officer.
High Court's strong message
Calling the matter "serious", the High Court observed that such actions directly undermine judicial independence and the fearless functioning of courts.
The Bench directed the Director General of Police (DGP) and the Additional Chief Secretary/Principal Secretary (Home) to file personal affidavits within three days detailing the steps taken to identify and prosecute those responsible for issuing threats.
The court also ordered that Judge Khan continue to receive police protection but stressed that security alone would not be enough unless strict legal action was taken against those behind the intimidation campaign.
Also Read:As Punjab Sees Crackdown on Protesters, Bombay High Court Upholds Citizens’ Right to Dissent
Significantly, the Bench observed that every judicial order is subject to appeal or revision before higher courts, but judges cannot be threatened simply because a section of society disagrees with their decisions.
"The judicial officer cannot be threatened merely because he or she chooses to pass a particular order," the Bench said, underlining that judicial decisions must be challenged through legal remedies and not through intimidation.
Bar bodies rally behind judge
The controversy has drawn strong reactions from the legal fraternity.
The Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) condemned the threats, online abuse and intimidation against Judge Khan, calling upon the Madhya Pradesh government and High Court to ensure her safety and take strict legal action against those responsible.
The SCBA said district judges form the backbone of India's justice delivery system and must be able to discharge their constitutional duties without fear or external pressure.
Similarly, the Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association (SCAORA) expressed solidarity with the judge, stressing that judicial verdicts should be challenged only before appellate courts and never through threats or vilification of judges.
A larger issue of judicial independence
The High Court's intervention goes beyond the safety of one judicial officer. The case highlights growing concerns over attempts to intimidate judges through social media campaigns, public protests and threats after sensitive verdicts.
Legal experts say such incidents pose a direct challenge to the independence of the judiciary, one of the basic features of the Constitution. If judges are forced to decide cases under fear of personal attacks or violence, public confidence in the justice system itself comes under threat.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has now fixed the matter for further hearing after directing senior state officials, including the DGP, Home Department and Superintendent of Police, Narmadapuram, to place on record the action taken against those responsible for the threats.
The court's message is unequivocal: judicial orders can be appealed, but judges cannot be intimidated.
What's Your Reaction?
Like
0
Dislike
0
Love
0
Funny
0
Angry
0
Sad
0
Wow
0
