Supreme Court declines to entertain former Nagaland judge’s plea against disciplinary proceedings

The Supreme Court on Friday refused to entertain a plea filed by Inalo Zhimomi, former Principal District and Sessions Judge of Dimapur in Nagaland, challenging the departmental proceedings initiated against him in connection with the alleged misappropriation of over ₹14 lakh in cash surety deposits [Inalo Zhimomi v. State of Nagaland]..Zhimomi, who had earlier secured anticipatory bail in the criminal case in relation to the same issue, approached the apex court seeking relief in the disciplinary proceedings initiated by the High Court..During the hearing, his counsel submitted that the disciplinary action stemmed from two judicial orders passed by Zhimomi in which he had directed release of seized vehicles. "High Court took cognizance and said I could not order release of vehicles as per the law. Then he granted bail to someone…" the counsel argued..However the bench of Justices KV Viswanathan and N Kotiswar Singh made it clear that the apex court would not interfere in such matters and the judge is at liberty to exonerate himself in the disciplinary proceedings. “We will not sit on appeal on such decisions. Exonerate yourself. Right or wrong - face the proceeding and come out clean," said the top court. .The petitioner’s counsel then sought permission to withdraw the petition with liberty to approach the High Court in review. The Court allowed the request..When the counsel sought to bring up the urgency of impending disciplinary proceedings, scheduled for the next day, the Bench firmly said, “No, no, nothing doing. He is a judicial officer of the High Court and High Court has decided it.”.The case stemmed from an FIR registered under Sections 316(4)/(5) (criminal breach of trust), 337 (forgery of court record) and 3(5) (criminal conspiracy) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) following directions of the Gauhati High Court. The complaint alleged that ₹14.35 lakh in bail amounts related to 28 criminal cases had been collected by the judge but not deposited. The FIR was based on a letter by the current Principal District Judge of Dimapur.Zhimomi challenged the allegations, asserting that he had raised systemic concerns over cash surety procedures as early as 2013. According to his writ petition pending before the Gauhati High Court, he had, during his tenure as Chief Judicial Magistrate at Kohima, written to the Protocol Judge of the High Court highlighting irregular practices in handling bail bond amounts..Zhimomi was later posted as District and Sessions Judge at Mon, where he was suspended and issued a show-cause notice under the Nagaland Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1967. On March 25, he was compulsorily retired under Rule 20(2) of the Nagaland Judicial Service Rules, 2006.He has since challenged the disciplinary process as being violative of natural justice and Supreme Court precedents. During the pendency of his writ petition, an Inquiry Officer was appointed by the Registrar (Vigilance), prompting Zhimomi to raise procedural objections about the legality of conducting disciplinary inquiry after compulsory retirement..His application for anticipatory bail was earlier rejected by the Gauhati High Court on May 29. He then secured anticipatory bail from the apex court on June 17. .Advocates Siddhartha Borgohain, Aditya Giri and Watitemjen Jamir appeared for the petitioner-judge..[Read Order]