The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has dismissed a petition filed by a former judicial officer, Naveen Jamwal, who was removed from service after being found guilty of accepting money from three men on the false promise of getting them government jobs. A bench of Justice Rajnesh Oswal and Justice Sanjay Parihar refused to interfere with the punishment, saying the officer was given every chance to defend himself but chose to stay away from the entire proceedings.
Background Of The Case
Jamwal was appointed as a Civil Judge (Junior Division) in 2013 and posted at Doda as Munsiff/Additional Mobile Magistrate. According to the case set up by the High Court's Registrar Vigilance, three local residents Chambail Singh, Ranjit Singh and Rattan Singh paid him ₹2.50 lakh each between 2015 and later years, believing his assurance that he would get them Class IV jobs in the judicial department by influencing senior officers and selection committee members.
The complainants said the jobs never came through, and when they asked for their money back, the officer allegedly refused to entertain them and even threatened to get them arrested. They wrote a formal complaint to the Acting Chief Justice in March 2018, backed by an affidavit and a compact disc said to contain a recorded conversation.
A preliminary inquiry found the complaints credible, following which the Full Court ordered a regular departmental inquiry in December 2018. Justice Sanjeev Kumar was appointed Enquiry Officer. Jamwal did not appear despite repeated notices served through the Principal District Judge and even via WhatsApp and email so the inquiry went ahead ex parte. He was held guilty, and the Full Court eventually recommended his removal, which the Government notified in May 2022.
Court's Observations
The bench went through the original record and found the petitioner's claims did not hold up. The petitioner was duly served both with the charge-sheet and the notices issued during the regular inquiry, and the direction issued by the Enquiry Officer for communicating the dates of hearing through telephone, WhatsApp and e-mail was also complied with.
On the CD issue, the court noted that the Enquiry Officer had not actually relied on the recording to decide the case the finding of guilt rested mainly on the oral testimony of the three complainants, which went unchallenged simply because Jamwal chose not to cross-examine anyone.
The bench also pointed out something significant the writ petition did not contain even a whisper that the allegations levelled by the complainants were false, fabricated or actuated by mala fides, with the challenge resting almost entirely on procedural objections.
The judges were firm on the larger principle involved, observing that the office of a Judicial Officer demands unimpeachable integrity, absolute honesty and conduct that inspires public confidence in the administration of justice, and the credibility of the judicial institution rests not merely upon the correctness of judicial decisions but equally upon the character and rectitude of those who man it.
Decision
The court held that the disciplinary proceedings were conducted strictly as per the applicable service rules, that Jamwal was given more than enough opportunity to put forward his defence, and that the findings against him were backed by evidence on record.
Finding the punishment neither excessive nor legally flawed, the bench dismissed the writ petition and upheld the Government Order removing him from service, with no order as to costs.
Case Details:
Case Title: Naveen Jamwal v. High Court of J&K and Ladakh and Others
Case Number: WP(C) No. 2510/2022, CM No. 6864/2022
Judges: Justice Rajnesh Oswal and Justice Sanjay Parihar
Decision Date: July 31, 2026
-300x169.webp)
