New Delhi: Retired Madhya Pradesh High Court judge Rohit Arya, who joined the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) on 13 July, less than three months after his retirement, is no stranger to controversy.
Arya enrolled as a lawyer in August 1984 and was designated a senior advocate in August 2003 by the Madhya Pradesh High Court. He practised for over 29 years before being sworn in as a high court judge in September 2013 and as a permanent judge in March 2015.
He retired in late April this year and joined the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) Saturday in the presence of Madhya Pradesh Deputy Chief Minister Rajendra Shukla.
During his tenure as a judge, Arya passed several controversial orders, which kept him in the headlines and evoked social media fanfare, with several video recordings of his hearings going viral.
In one of his first big judgments after becoming a permanent judge in 2015, a bench comprising Justice Arya quashed the FIR against then Madhya Pradesh governor Ram Naresh Yadav in connection with the MP Professional Examination Board (MPPEB) scam. The bench was headed by retired Supreme Court judge A.M. Khanwilkar, known for his ‘establishmentarian’ legacy in the court and appointed the new Lokpal chairperson earlier this year.
From directing an allegedly abusive husband to live with his wife’s family in an attempt at “reuniting” them to his oral remarks during the hearing of comedian Munawar Faruqui’s bail hearing and his direction for tying rakhi as a bail condition for a man accused of outraging a woman’s modesty, Arya’s orders have often been in the limelight.
Also read: With emphasis on diversity & representation, collegium recommends 2 HC judges for elevation to SC
‘Some people must not be spared’
One of the highlights of Arya’s career was his oral remarks in 2021 during the bail hearing of stand-up comic Munawar Faruqui who was arrested for allegedly insulting religious sentiments.
During one of the hearings, Arya reportedly asked the lawyers for Faruqui and his co-accused Nalin Yadav’s lawyers, “But why do you take undue advantage of others’ religious sentiments and emotions? What is wrong with your mindset? How can you do this for the purpose of your business?”
“Such people must not be spared,” he remarked while reserving his order on 25 January.
Citing these oral remarks, now TMC MP Saket Gokhale, at the time, sent a letter petition to the Madhya Pradesh High Court Chief Justice, urging that the bail applications filed by the accused in the Faruqui case be heard by a bench other than Arya’s in the interests of the public.
Arya’s order rejecting Faruqui and Yadav’s bail application came days later, with the bench asserting that the prosecution evidence collected so far prima facie suggested that the two accused made “scurrilous, disparaging utterances” with a “deliberate intendment” to “outrage religious feelings of a class of citizens”.
“It is not a case of no evidence,” the judge held. That was the third time Faruqui’s and Yadav’s bail was rejected.
Faruiqui was later given bail by the Supreme Court, and Yadav’s bail followed.
Also read: From Shah Bano to marriage laws: What SC said about maintenance for Muslim women
‘Healing process’
The same year, in 2021, hearing the bail application of advocate Vijay Singh Yadav, arrested for allegedly sending an indecent message to a Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC) in Ratlam district, Arya said that “it appears expedient to direct for his mental check-up through a qualified doctor or a psychiatrist and submit a report before the court”.
Arya went on to order a mental check-up for the man.
In 2022, Arya directed a husband, who allegedly physically abused his wife, kicked her out of the house and forcibly kept their two-year-old son with him, to go live with his wife’s family for one month, along with their son. This, the judge said, was “so that the family gets reunited for all times to come”. He called it a “healing process for healthy and united life of the couple with their baby” while directing the wife’s parents to “ensure good care of” him.
In 2022, a bench headed by Arya ordered an investigation against an Arya Samaj trust in Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh, for allegedly “converting people from one religion to another” and “solemnising marriages” without any authority of law. A video of Arya questioning the conversion and warning the petitioner with a police enquiry had gone viral, at the time. However, the Supreme Court stayed this order in January 2023, and the case remains pending.
Earlier, in September 2019, he imposed a fine of Rs 50,000 on Medanta Hospital, Indore, for not having an Internal Complaints Committee (ICC), required to be constituted under the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013. He also directed the hospital to pay a compensation of Rs 25 lakh to a former employee, who had alleged sexual harassment in 2016, for her “pain and suffering”.
Also read: After 16 years, SC comes to rescue of visually impaired CSE 2008 candidates, directs appointment
‘Tie rakhi’
Arya, back in July 2020, made headlines when he granted bail to a man accused of outraging the modesty of a woman on the condition that he request the complainant to tie him a rakhi.
“The applicant along with his wife shall visit the house of the complainant with rakhi thread/band on 3rd August 2020 at 11 am with a box of sweets and request the complainant…to tie the rakhi…on him with the promise to protect her to the best of his ability for all times to come,” the order granting bail to one Vikram had said.
Vikram had allegedly gone to the complainant’s house at 2.30 am on 20 April and attempted to harass her. He was then booked under Indian Penal Code sections 452 (house trespass after preparation for hurt, assault or wrongful restraint), 354A (sexual harassment), 354 (assault or criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modesty), 323 (voluntarily causing hurt) and 506 (criminal intimidation).
The order had led to widespread outrage, with several women lawyers, including Supreme Court lawyer Aparna Bhat, who challenged the order in the top court. The SC had then, in March 2021, set aside the order.
At the same time, the court also forbade judges from making gender stereotypical comments such as “good women are sexually chaste”, “every woman wants to be a mother”, and that being alone at night or wearing certain clothes makes women responsible for being attacked.
More particularly, commenting on Justice Arya’s order, the court had observed, “Using rakhi tying as a condition for bail, transforms a molester into a brother, by a judicial mandate. This is wholly unacceptable, and has the effect of diluting and eroding the offence of sexual harassment.”
Also read: Take action against lawyers advertising, seeking work via online portals — BCI to state bar councils
‘Real hero’
Arya witnessed much online stardom, becoming one of the most popular judges on viewing platforms. Some of these videos featuring him racked up over 10 lakh views.
In one of them, he responds to a lawyer demanding bail for a client on the ground that his wife is soon to deliver a baby, saying, “Kitni baar biwi ki delivery karwaoge? (How many times will you make his wife deliver a baby)?” His comment pointed out that the same reason had been offered to justify bail earlier as well. The video has since been taken down from the platform where it was uploaded but is available elsewhere online.
In a Facebook reel, Arya is shown scolding police officers for a rape and murder case probe, saying “Don’t cross your limits!” A social media user on the comment thread cheered him, saying, “Real hero, we proud of you my lord (sic)”.
However, this stardom also brought much criticism. The Internet was divided when Arya was caught on camera scolding a law student sitting in the visitors’ gallery and sipping water from his water bottle during a hearing.
“This is not a cafeteria,” he remarked, adding, “You cannot just open your bottle and start drinking water. Go out if you want to have something. Drinking water, coffee, etc., is not allowed in my courtroom.”
(Edited by Madhurita Goswami)
Also read: ‘False tweets, maliciously made’: HC order in Lakshmi Puri’s defamation case against Saket Gokhale
The disease of wokeness seems to have spread amongst The Print reporters too.
Every time a HC or SC judge joins any political party, they dig out so called “controversial” judgements given by them. A really cheap tactic of essentially questioning their integrity.
Whereas when established journalists join political parties and are sent to Rajya Sabha, the sane reporters have no objections at all. When it comes to their own profession, everything is permissible. Instead of questioning the integrity of such journalists, they provide them with a platform to spread their jaundiced views of the world and current state of affairs.
An example – Ms. Sagarika Ghose, joined TMC and sent to the Rajya Sabha, regularly writes for The Print, where she never speaks about the series of horrific events taking place in Bengal over the last few months – Taliban style courts and justice dispensation, political violence, corruption permeating the entire system of governance.
The message is clear – if you are from the media industry, you get a free pass.