What is the new Supreme Court requirement for allegations against public servants?

The Supreme Court has mandated that all applications alleging offenses by public servants must be supported by an affidavit.

Why does the Supreme Court require affidavits for public servant allegations?

The requirement aims to ensure the authenticity of complaints, weed out false or frivolous claims, and protect public servants from the abuse of the judicial process.

Can magistrates reject applications against public servants?

Yes, judicial magistrates can reject applications against public servants if the allegations are wholly untenable, manifestly absurd, or inherently improbable, provided valid reasons are given.

Home / Crime and Justice / SC: Complaints Against Officials Require Affidavit

SC: Complaints Against Officials Require Affidavit

28 Jan

•

Summary

Supreme Court mandates affidavits for all public servant allegations.
Justices cited similar rules for judicial officers.
Magistrates can reject untenable complaints with reasons.

SC: Complaints Against Officials Require Affidavit

The Supreme Court has mandated that applications alleging offenses by public servants must be accompanied by an affidavit. This decision, made on Tuesday, aims to ensure the authenticity of such complaints.

A bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Manmohan highlighted that this requirement is consistent with existing rules for complaints against judicial officers. The court found no rational basis to differentiate, stating the common goal is to filter out false or vexatious claims and protect public servants from abuse of the legal system.

Furthermore, the court clarified that judicial magistrates possess the authority to reject applications filed against public servants if the allegations are entirely unsubstantiated, clearly absurd, or highly improbable. However, any such rejection order must be supported by valid reasoning and not arbitrary.