Supreme Court Declines To Intervene In Ex-Nagaland Judge’s Disciplinary Case

The Supreme Court recently declined to hear a petition filed by Inalo Zhimomi, the former Principal District and Sessions Judge of Dimapur, Nagaland, who sought to challenge disciplinary proceedings against him over alleged embezzlement of ₹14.35 lakh in cash surety deposits.

Zhimomi, having earlier obtained anticipatory bail in a connected criminal case, approached the top court to quash the disciplinary action initiated by the Gauhati High Court.

However, a bench comprising Justices KV Viswanathan and N Kotiswar Singh refused to intervene, remarking, “We will not sit on appeal on such decisions. Exonerate yourself. Right or wrong – face the proceeding and come out clean.”

Judge Argues Disciplinary Action Linked to Judicial Rulings

Zhimomi’s legal team contended that the proceedings stemmed from two judicial orders he had passed directing the release of impounded vehicles. “High Court took cognizance and said I could not order release of vehicles as per the law. Then he granted bail to someone…” the counsel argued.

The allegations against Zhimomi emerged from an FIR registered under:

Sections 316(4)/(5) (criminal breach of trust),
Section 337 (forgery of court record),
Section 3(5) (criminal conspiracy) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).

The complaint accused him of failing to deposit bail amounts collected in 28 criminal cases.

Petition Withdrawn With Liberty To Approach High Court

With a disciplinary hearing looming, Zhimomi’s counsel sought permission to withdraw the Supreme Court petition and instead pursue a review before the High Court, a request the bench permitted. When the counsel emphasized the urgency of the matter, the justices firmly stated, “No, no, nothing doing. He is a judicial officer of the High Court and High Court has decided it.”

Zhimomi maintains that he had flagged irregularities in cash surety procedures as far back as 2013. After being transferred as District and Sessions Judge in Mon, he faced suspension, a show-cause notice, and eventual compulsory retirement.

He has contested the disciplinary proceedings, alleging violations of natural justice and established legal precedents.

The case continues to unfold as Zhimomi seeks judicial recourse against the actions taken against him.

Read More: Supreme Court, Delhi High Court, States High Court, International