MP High Court Seeks DGP Affidavit After Narmadapuram Judge Threatened for Passing Order

A Division Bench of Justices Vivek Agarwal and Avanindra Kumar Singh takes suo motu note of constant threats received by Additional Judge Smt. Tabassum Khan at Narmadapuram from members of the public aggrieved by her order, directs police protection immediately, calls for personal affidavits of the DGP and ACS (Home) within three days, and holds that a judicial officer “cannot be threatened merely because he or she chooses to pass a particular order.”

The Madhya Pradesh High Court at Jabalpur on July 1, 2026 took serious note of constant threats being received by a judicial officer at Narmadapuram by certain members of the public aggrieved by an order she had passed, directing police protection for the officer and calling for personal affidavits from the Director General of Police and the Additional Chief Secretary/Principal Secretary (Home) within three days on the steps being taken to apprehend the miscreants.

A Division Bench of Justice Vivek Agarwal and Justice Avanindra Kumar Singh, hearing a suo motu writ petition concerning the service conditions and welfare of judicial officers in Madhya Pradesh, took note of the development through both counsel for the High Court and through media reports. The Bench stated in unequivocal terms: “This is a serious matter.”

The Incident: Judge at Narmadapuram Under Threat

It was brought to the Court’s notice during the hearing that Smt. Tabassum Khan, Additional Judge, Seonimalva, attached to the Court of the First District and Additional Sessions Judge, Narmadapuram, Madhya Pradesh, had been subjected to constant threats by certain members of society following her passing of an order against one of the stakeholders in a matter before her. The identity of the miscreants and the nature of the original order have not been disclosed in the Court’s order.

At the time of hearing, it was informed to the Court that police protection had already been extended to the judicial officer by the Superintendent of Police, Narmadapuram. The Court directed the SP, Narmadapuram to additionally inform the Court as to what specific steps had been taken to book the persons responsible for creating an atmosphere of threats.

Deputy Advocate General Abhijeet Awasthy, appearing for the State, submitted before the Court that an FIR had been registered in the matter.

Court’s Observations on Judicial Independence

The Bench expressed its considered view that threats of this nature directly hamper the judicial independence and fearless working of judicial officers. It emphatically held that while any order passed by a judicial officer is subject to judicial scrutiny through the appropriate appellate or revisional forum, a judicial officer cannot be threatened on account of passing an order that is not to the liking of a section of society.

“Any order passed by the Judicial Officer is subject to judicial scrutiny as per the forum provided for said scrutiny, be in the form of appeal or revision, but our judicial officer cannot be threatened merely because he or she choses to pass a particular order and that is not of liking of the certain section of the society.” - MP High Court

The Court also noted that such activities directly hamper the judicial independence and fearless working of its judicial officers, underscoring the institutional dimension of the concern beyond the individual safety of the officer in question.

Directions

The Court issued the following directions: the Additional Advocate General was requested to take notice and file personal affidavits of the Director General of Police and the Additional Chief Secretary/Principal Secretary (Home) within three days, explaining what steps are being taken to book the miscreants who have created an atmosphere of fear for the judicial officer at Narmadapuram. The Superintendent of Police, Narmadapuram, was also directed to file an affidavit detailing the action taken against the miscreants. Notice was issued on I.A. Nos. 4702/2026, 6957/2026 and 22611/2025. The matter has been listed for further hearing on July 9, 2026.

Case Details

• Case Title: In Reference (Suo Motu) (Judicial Officers of the State of M.P.) v. The State of Madhya Pradesh and Others
• Case Number: WP No. 12756 of 2016
• Court: High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur
• Bench: Justice Vivek Agarwal and Justice Avanindra Kumar Singh
• Date of Order: July 1, 2026
• For Petitioner: Shri Brajesh Nath Mishra, Advocate
• For State: Ms. Janhvi Pandit, Additional Advocate General; Shri Abhijeet Awasthy, Deputy Advocate General
• For Intervener: Shri Rohan Harne, Advocate