In this case, prayer was made for expunction of adverse remarks made against appellant, a senior lawyer, by High Court while deciding four cases in which appellant was representing one of the contesting parties. The Court observed that while it is of fundamental importance in realm of administration of justice to allow Judges to discharge their functions freely and fearlessly without interference from anyone, it is equally important for Judges to exercise restraint and avoid unnecessary remarks on conduct of counsel which has no bearing on adjudication of dispute. Held, on perusing offending remarks recorded in High Court judgment, it is found that those were unnecessary for deciding the dispute and could have been avoided. Moreover they appear to be based on the personal perception of the learned judge. It is also apparent that the learned judge did not, before recording the adverse comments, give any opportunity to the appellant to put forth his explanation. Held, that the offending remarks should be recalle to avoid any future harm to the appellant’s reputation or his work as a member of bar.
[Neeraj Garg v. Sarita Rani, (2021) 9 SCC 92]