VIGILANCE MANUAL VOLUME III - AP Online

DECISION - 188
(187)
445
Judicial Service — disciplinary control
The word ‘control’ accompanied by the word ‘vest’
shows that High Court alone is the sole custodian
of control over judiciary, including suspension from
service.
Chief Justice of Andhra Pradesh vs. L.V.A. Dikshitulu,
AIR 1979 SC 193
The Supreme Court considered the scope of Art. 235 of
Constitution and observed that the control over the subordinate
judiciary vested in High Court under Art. 235 is exclusive in nature,
comprehensive in extent and effective in operation, and that the word
‘control’ accompanied by the word ‘vest’ shows that the High Court
alone is made the sole custodian of the control over the judiciary and
this control being exclusive and not dual, an enquiry into the conduct
of a member of judiciary can be held by the High Court alone and no
other authority and that the power of the High Court extends to
suspension from service of a member of the judiciary with a view to
hold a disciplinary enquiry.
(188)
(A) P.C. Act, 1988 — Secs. 7, 13(1)(d)
(B) Trap — corroboration of trap witness
Court can act on uncorroborated testimony of a trap
witness.
(C) P.C. Act, 1988 — Secs. 7, 13(1)(d)
(D) Trap — hostile witness
(E) Evidence — of hostile witness
Rejection of evidence of hostile witness, permissible.
(F) P.C. Act, 1988 — Secs. 7, 13(1)(d)
(G) Trap — conduct of accused
Conduct of accused admissible under sec. 8 Evidence Act.