The New Indian Express ·
‘I’d rather die than be called a coward judge’: Muzaffarnagar Judge after cases recalled
LUCKNOW:Expressing dismay over the alleged recall of cases from his court after he awarded 22 death penalties within a span of four months, with the 23rd on September 7, Additional District and Sessions Judge, Muzaffarnagar, Ravi Kumar Diwakar claimed that serious cases were recalled from his court to benefit mafia and criminals, as he said that he was "deeply hurt and saddened" by the conduct.
He added that he would rather choose to die than be called a "coward judge". The observations came in a judgment in which Judge Diwakar awarded the death penalty to convict Nadeem for deliberately burning his wife (Shahzadi) alive. The court held that the manner in which Nadeem killed his wife was "extremely brutal and barbaric" and fell within the "rarest of rare" category.
The court further observed that the killing was not merely a deprivation of life but an act that seriously violated the victim's human dignity. Judge Diwakar ultimately found the case to fall in the category of ‘Rarest of Rare’, and accordingly, he awarded the accused the death penalty under Section 302 IPC, along with a ₹1 lakh fine.
The judge alleged that the reason behind the recall of case files was to "save mafias/gangsters/criminals". While delivering the death sentence to Nadeem, his 23rd convict, Judge Diwakar said he knew the complete details of why it had happened but considered it inappropriate to disclose them at that point.
"There is also the dignity of the office," he said.
It may be noted that last month, as many as 97 pending cases involving murder and other serious offences were recalled from his court, days after he awarded 22 death sentences in 10 different cases over a four-month period.
Delivering the 38-page judgment containing a substantial portion of his observations on various issues, Judge Diwakar said he could not help but express his personal views. He remarked that although a person may deceive the world, he could not deceive his own conscience.
The judge then alleged that such conduct of withdrawing cases from his court was intended to "save mafias/gangsters/criminals". He added that following the withdrawal, a message was conveyed to him through "a mafia/gangster from the west".
According to the judge, the message was that only the case files had initially been removed and that if he pursued the matter or made any comment, influence would be used to get his court changed or have him transferred out of the district because of "contacts at higher levels".
Judge Diwakar added that major mafia and strongmen in western Uttar Pradesh had caste and political protection and networks extending "quite high and far".
Judge Diwakar said his parents had taught him from childhood to fear God and no other person. He observed that if he became afraid of "bahubalis/mafias/criminals", it would be in conflict with the public's expectation that judges remain impartial, fearless and able to discharge their judicial functions without fear.
He also asserted that as long as he occupied the judicial chair, the authority to take a decision/judgment "will be solely mine". The judge went on to link judicial independence with the Rule of Law and democracy. He observed thus: "For any democratic country, it is a serious crisis when judges are unable to administer justice due to the fear, pressure or influence of mafias/gangsters/criminals".
According to him, such a situation causes the social and legal system to collapse, allowing mafias, gangsters and criminals to become fearless while weaker and innocent persons become 'scapegoats'.
He said that in front of the law of the land, all persons were equal. The same law cannot be applied differently to two persons. He questioned whether mafias, strongmen and criminals should effectively face a different legal regime from ordinary citizens.
"Today, the world needs justice more than charity. In the absence of justice, freedom has no meaning," he added.
Meanwhile, the court, in the present case, found that Nadeem deliberately poured kerosene on Shahzadi and set her on fire. It observed that Shahzadi was in a vulnerable and helpless condition and the manner of killing was extremely brutal and barbaric.
The court said that showing sympathy towards such an offender could create a precedent where a husband could burn his wife alive and still receive judicial sympathy.
The court then posed a question to the "great people of India" as to how a person who burnt a helpless woman alive should be treated by the court and whether such a person deserved sympathy.
Answering the question itself, the court said that such a person was "not at all" entitled to sympathy and that the maximum punishment (death penalty) was the appropriate punishment.
Towards the end of the judgment, Judge Diwakar directed that a copy of the decision be sent to the Chief Secretary, Uttar Pradesh Government, with directions to ensure that in serious Sessions cases, where the State was the complainant and conducted the prosecution on behalf of the victim, the District Government Counsel (Criminal) was given an opportunity to place his case if such Sessions records were transferred from one court to another without any reason and with the intention of benefiting criminals, strongmen or accused persons.
The judge said this would be necessary in accordance with the principles of natural justice, so that in future "criminals/mafia/bahubalis" cannot choose a court of their preference.
Judge Diwakar has been posted in Muzaffarnagar since November 2025. He first came into the spotlight in 2022 while serving as a civil judge in Varanasi when he ordered a videographic survey of the Gyanvapi Mosque premises in Varanasi.
Judge Diwakar came back into the spotlight in March 2024 when he hailed Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath as a prime example of a "religious person" holding a seat of power in the State. He also likened CM Adityanath to the idea of a ‘Philosopher King’ as outlined by Plato in his Socratic dialogue, Republic.