Muzaffarnagar Judge Who Gave 23 Death Sentences In 2026 Questions Recall Of 97 Murder Cases

Ravi Kumar Diwakar a Muzaffarnagar judge, who has issued 23 death sentences this year, has questioned the recall of 97 murder cases from his court. He called the District Judge’s administrative order “unlawful” and “without jurisdiction” after nine orders dated August 18, 2026 shifted the serious matters out of his docket.

Diwakar said the files included 97 part-heard murder matters that had already been taken up by his court. He asked how they could be moved through administrative orders and noted that the directions were issued only days before the District Judge retired.

It also comes days after Diwakar again drew attention for his remarks on pressure from mafias and strongmen.

September Hearing

The issue came up while he was hearing a 2015 narcotics case. On September 17, while deciding the case filed under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, Diwakar began drafting his protest against the recall order.

Earlier, on September 7, he had delivered his 23rd death sentence in 2026 and said he “would rather die” than be called a “coward” and give in to the diktats of mafias, strongmen, or criminals. Despite that action, the September 7 death penalty was in a dowry death case.

In the NDPS matter, Diwakar acquitted the accused and pointed to “prolonged litigation”, referring to the “tareekh pe tareekh” line from Damini, the 1993 Hindi film.

Recall Order Challenge

Diwakar set out his legal objection in direct terms. “The provisions under CrPC and BNSS provide that the sessions judge cannot recall ‘part-heard’ files. Therefore, on August 18, 2026, the then District Judge, Muzaffarnagar, passed nine similar orders, recalling 97 part-heard murder cases from my court to his. The said orders were, in themselves, contrary to law, i.e., without jurisdiction, and the files were recalled merely 13 days before his retirement, without assigning any reason,” he told the Indian Express.

He linked the dispute to the timing of the transfer. In his account, the then District Judge issued all nine similar orders on August 18 and retired 13 days later.

Diwakar also framed the issue around what later decisions would mean if the transfer itself was invalid. “If cases were subsequently decided by the district judge or another court after being moved under an administrative order that was legally invalid, would the decisions passed in those cases themselves be legally sustainable?” he asked.

The judgment was aimed at those specific administrative orders, not at a general statement that judicial officers may ignore directions whenever they disagree with them.

He also questioned the use of the word “recall” in the August 18 orders. In his view, the matters had already become part-heard, and no reasons were recorded for moving the 97 serious cases.

He noted that the law allows a Sessions Judge to shift criminal cases from one criminal court to another within the sessions division, and that this power does not stop merely because a trial has begun. But, he said, the power must serve the ends of justice and cannot be treated as an unlimited administrative authority.

Power And Responsibility

Diwakar widened the argument beyond the transfer orders. “The work of a judge is to do justice, but if injustice is done to the same judge, then where will he go?” he said, while asking how a judicial officer should follow an administrative direction that he considers contrary to law or without jurisdiction.

He then turned to the conduct expected of public servants. “A public servant should have the ability to call what is right, right, and what is wrong, wrong. This is because a public servant is not merely a public servant; rather, he or she is a part of, and represents, the system or institution to which they belong. Any system or institution can function and endure only when the public servants running it can call what is right, right, and what is wrong, wrong,” he said.

He added that public servants are part of the institutions they serve and are not above the law. “In India, there is the rule of law, which means that no one is above the law, and this country will be run by the rule of law, rather than by the arbitrary conduct of any public servant, because they are not kings,” he said.

He also addressed the use of authority in judicial administration. “When a person acquires too much power, they often tend to misuse it for their own benefit. Power itself is neither good nor bad; its nature depends on how the person who possesses it chooses to use it,” he said.

Diwakar continued, “Power must be accompanied by responsibility and discretion. When checks on power cease to exist, a person begins to consider themselves above the law and morality. That is the moment when authority, instead of remaining a means of protection, becomes a means of oppression,” he added.

He also cited Lord Acton’s line, “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely”. Diwakar acknowledged that a Sessions Judge can transfer criminal cases from one court to another within the sessions division, but said that power must be used for the ends of justice and cannot be treated as unrestricted administrative power.

Who Is Ravi Kumar Diwakar?

Ravi Kumar Diwakar is an Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court) in Muzaffarnagar, Uttar Pradesh. According to the Allahabad High Court’s official profile, he was born on July 5, 1980, and is from Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh. He joined the Uttar Pradesh judicial service as a Munsif/Civil Judge (Junior Division) on December 17, 2009, and was promoted to Civil Judge (Senior Division) on March 21, 2017.

He was confirmed as a Civil Judge (Junior Division) on August 11, 2021, and joined the Higher Judicial Service on November 20, 2023.

Diwakar completed his schooling in 1997 and intermediate education in 1999, followed by a B.Com degree in 2002. He obtained his LL.B. in 2005 and LL.M. in 2007, with all the listed qualifications recorded as second division.

He has also undergone judicial training at the Judicial Training and Research Institute (JTRI), Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow, including an induction training programme, a refresher programme for civil judges and training on Ubuntu 16.04 and CIS 2.0.