In the case of Ashvini Vijay Shiriyannavar v. State of Karnataka and ors, the Supreme Court bench of Justices AS Bopanna and Pankaj Mithal has set aside the High Court order of sending a Mysore Judicial Officer for training at the judicial academy so that she learns to apply her mind while exercising the discretion to grant bail.

The High Court had previously upheld that the judicial officer had not used her judicial discretion and passed adverse and capricious orders and therefore ordered that she may be sent to the judicial academy so that she may be able to use her mind before granting bail in such serious offences. They justified that her training was necessary in order to upheld the interest of the judicial institution.

 The Supreme Court however held that such orders against trial judges make them scared and reluctant to grant bail in such cases and increases the burden of High Court and Supreme Court. The female judicial officer was represented by Basavaprabhu S Patil, Senior Advocate, assisted by Anirudh Sanganeria and Samarth Kashyap, Advocates.

The respondents were represented by Sabarish Subramanian, Shubhranshu Padhi, Vishnu Unnikrishnan, Naman Dwivedi, C Kranthi Kumar, Danish Saifi, Vishal Banshal, Rajeshawari Shankar, Niroop Sukrithy, Jai Nirupam and Ashish Yadav, Advocates.