Adieu Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan: From Hills of Himachal to the Heart of Jharkhand

On the 9th of January 1964, the day passed without proclamation, yet destiny had already begun its careful work, shaping a life that would one day speak for justice itself. “Tarlok” means shining brave warrior. From being a first-generation lawyer to rising to the office of Justice of the Himachal Pradesh High Court and then Chief Justice of the Jharkhand High Court. His journey is an inspiration for the lawyers who hail from a group of aspirants who call themselves first-generation lawyers. In his retirement speech, he gave some advice, and that is what he got when he joined the illustrious chamber of Lala Chhabil Dass after completing his studies in 1989. He told him, “Deserve before you desire,” and that is what made him this hardworking. He is known as the “arrears cruncher” for disposing of more than 75,000 cases as a Companion Judge of the Hon’ble Himachal Pradesh High Court.

In the words of Roosevelt, “Justice consists not in being neutral between right and wrong, but in finding out the right and upholding it, wherever found, against the wrong.”

In times when the State arbitrarily exercises its power, it is the court to whom the citizen looks up with hope and believes it to be the place where his voice will be heard undeterred. Justice Chauhan always stood firm against the adamant behavior of the state. We can resort to this view from several inferences, but what comes to my mind is when, in the case of weaker private parties in the State of Jharkhand v. R.K. Construction Private Limited, the divisional bench comprising Chief Justice Chauhan and Justice Rajesh Shankar held that the State is not an ordinary litigant seeking to win a case by hook or crook as if it is a war!. The state’s obligation is not to score or exploit a weaker party to avoid its liability. And imposed a cost of one lakh rupees on the state.

In Jyoti Sharma v. State of Jharkhand, the bench comprising Chief Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan and Justice Sujit Narayan Prasad held that erring officials involved in the land encroachment on land of the RIMS, Ranchi, resulting in the illegal construction of pucca structures and residential houses, are to be penalized. The residents whose houses had been or were being demolished are entitled to compensation, but the burden of compensation should not be held on the state but on the officials of the State Municipal Corporation and other authorities. The bench ordered the Anti-Corruption Bureau to institute an FIR and start an investigation against the officials holding accountability.

Justice Chauhan was one of the few judges who advocated for the need for substantial development, especially in times when we need conservation of nature for an unprecedented time. Through a plethora of judgments, he made his authority a tool of judicial activism. In Suleman v. Union of India, in this petition regarding the ineffective solid waste management and the garbage crisis in Himachal Pradesh, Justice Tarlok and Justice Sushil Kukreja issued some revolutionary directions, like constituting a Special Task Force dedicated to the hotspot of garbage. The bench exclusively directed the State of Himachal Pradesh to activate its Plastic Buyback Policy Program to operate for twenty-four hours on all seven days of the week to give rag pickers an incentive to gather plastic waste for economic enhancement; it also publicized a toll-free number for the citizens to report the garbage dumps. The bench also directed the urban local bodies to conduct seminars on waste segregation for local officials and mooted for a dedicated Municipal Waste Management Corporation to institutionalize these above-mentioned efforts.

When the whole world was aghast and petrified by the April 2015 Nepal earthquake, the HP High Court took cognizance of the matter, stressed that Shimla is a high-risk seismic zone (IV-V), and issued a suo moto against the hazardous and unsafe construction of permanent structures in Shimla (Jewel of Orient) to prevent a perilous disaster leading to catastrophic consequences like Nepal. The bench comprising Justice Rajiv and Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan rebuked the officials for not complying with the earlier judgment in Yogendar Lal Sharma vs. Municipal Corporation Shimla and others (1983). The encroachment increased and gave a last chance to the officials to rectify their mistakes or else be ready to face consequences under Article 215 (Contempt of Court). Accordingly, the bench ordered (XXII) directions, including identifying illegal and unauthorized use of residential areas to be closed within six weeks.

In Ram Kishor V. The State of Jharkhand (2025): Jharkhand High Court, a divisional bench of Chief Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan and Justice Rajesh Shankar in December 2025, in the case has directed a complete crackdown on prohibited plastic bags in the state, ordering police through the Director General Of Police, Jharkand and authorities to stop their entry and circulation, including ensuring no public events over 500 people shall be organized without the prior consent of the Pollution Control Board and it it has to take a pre- deposit of rupees 10 per person that is refundable only after when the site is found to be vacated without the re being any prohibited plastic or material on the site. The case spotlighted the court’s clear and strong stance on all kinds of pollution, mainly on plastic, and pushed the government bodies and the Pollution Control Board to ban and enforce strict regulations to curb the circulation of plastic pollution.

In the absence of legislative statutes, it is the judiciary that takes the baton into its own hands. Some call it judicial activism; we would call it judicial necessity. When the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Youth Bar Association of India v. Union of India, on 07/09/2016, ruled and directed all the states that unless the nature of the offense is sensitive in nature, the FIR is to be uploaded online on the police or official state website within twenty-four hours. But Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan ruled a similar judgment and ordered to upload the FIR on the Himachal Pradesh Police website within twenty-four hours on 19/12/2014, which was one and a half years before the Hon’ble Apex Court’s order, and made it the third high court after the Hon’ble Delhi and Orissa High Courts to issue such directives, which showed Justice Tarlok’s visionary thinking regarding the openness and transparency in a just and free society.

No institution can boast of its being complete without there being respect for the ladies. When it came to highlighting that ladies in Shimla were charged a 5 rupee fee to use public urinals, which were meant to be free for all, be they men or women. The Himachal Pradesh High Court, on its own motion, took a suo moto, and Justice Tarlok held that the mentioned scenario is a violation of Articles 14, 15, and 21, and the very next day, “Free Toilet” signs went up and halted the charging for free urinals. In Reema vs. State of HP, when a 24-year-old spinster moved a petition against her transfer, the coram of Justice Tarlok and Jyotsana Rewal Dua held that “the women have proved their capability of managing the post from various hazardous duties that were wrongly considered to be executive for the male candidates.” Before demitting the office of the Chief Justice of Jharkhand, he conducted surprise inspections of homes for minor girls to review their conditions and ordered to speed up the restoration process and provide adequate foster care. He ensured that female advocates of Jharkhand must have a place with well-equipped toilet facilities and feeding rooms, ensuring that lack of basic facilities doesn’t turn out to be a hindrance for any female advocate.

Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan was also a pioneer of constitutional rights, from access to a safe environment to the right to be forgotten. On July 17th, 2024, a divisional bench comprising Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan and Justice Sushil Kukreja upheld the acquittal of an accused booked under the charges of the POSCO Act, 2012, and also addressed the question of the right to be forgotten of the accused to safeguard his privacy. The bench held that the right to privacy includes the right to be forgotten as an inherent aspect of personal liberty under Article 21 of the constitution. The court directed to conceal the names of the accused in digital records to shield their identity. It is significant, as the Hon’ble Supreme Court is yet to settle the law on the ‘Right To Be Forgotten.’

He demitted his office as a judge who stood for justice throughout his tenure, from the hills of Himachal to the heart of Jharkhand. The bar will remember him as a man of integrity and a jurist who knew nuances of law and always applied it for adjudicating and dispensing justice.

Co – author : Anurag Sourav – a fourth year law student at Savitribai Phule Pune University 

References:

1. State of Jharkhand v. R.K. Construction Private Limited. https://www.livelaw.in/high-court/jharkhand-high-court/jharkhand-high-court-imposed-cost-state-government-filing-frivolous-cases-514227
2. Jyoti Sharma v. State of Jharkhand, https://www.livelaw.in/high-court/jharkhand-high-court/jharkhand-high-court-orders-fir-rims-land-encroachment-case-516315
3. Suleman And Others vs. Union of India on 21 June, 2025 https://indiankanoon.org/doc/31568494/#:~:text=days%20from%20today.-,2.,given%20in%20the%20status%20report
4. (Courts on its own motion Vs State of Himachal Pradesh, CWPIL No. 14 of 2024)  https://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/248434/courts-on-its-own-motion-vs-state-of-himachal-pradesh-and-ot/#:~:text=41.,we%20issue%20certain%20stringent%20directions.

5. Ram Kishore vs The State of Jharkhand on 10 December 2025, https://indiankanoon.org/doc/35610418/

6. Upload the Copy of FIR within 24 Hours in the Website; High Court of HP directs Police . https://www.livelaw.in/upload-copy-fir-within-24-hours-website-high-court-hp-directs-police
7. Youth Bar Association of India Vs Union of India and Others https://www.livelaw.in/10-significant-guidelines-issued-supreme-court-fir
8. Women Being Charged For Using Urinals A ‘Serious Matter’: High Court Warns Shimla Municipal Corp & Sulabh Int’l Of Contempt Action https://www.livelaw.in/high-court/himachal-pradesh-high-court/himachal-pradesh-high-court-women-charged-urinals-serious-matter-toilets-warns-shimla-municipal-corp-sulabh-contempt-261279
9. Women Are Capably Manning The Posts In All Walks Of Life: HP HC Rejects Woman Forest Guard’s Challenge Against Transfer Order, https://www.livelaw.in/news-updates/hp-hc-rejects-woman-forest-guard-plea-against-transfer-order-159961

10. Jharkhand High Court Chief Justice Inspects Home For Minor Girls To Review Living Conditions, Directs Formation Of Female Officer Team https://www.livelaw.in/news-updates/jharkhand-high-court-chief-justice-home-for-minor-girls-living-conditions-311607
11. Right to be Forgotten, https://www.livelaw.in/high-court/himachal-pradesh-high-court/himachal-pradesh-high-court-right-to-be-forgotten-acquittal-pocso-act-accused-mask-names-parties-digital-records-263631#:~:text=A%20bench%20of%20Justice%20Tarlok,inherent%20aspect%20of%20personal%20liberty
12. Supreme Court To Settle Law On ‘Right To Be Forgotten’; Stays HC Direction To ‘IndianKanoon’ To Pull Down Judgment
    https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/supreme-court-to-settle-law-on-right-to-be-forgotten-stays-hc-direction-to-indiankanoon-to-pull-down-judgment-264401

Ayush Shubham

Ayush Shubham is a second-year B.A. LL.B. student at Savitribai Phule Pune University, with strong substantive practical exposure to constitutional law, criminal litigation, legal research, and judicial processes.