India | UP Judge Ravi Kumar Diwakar, Who Awarded 23 Death Sentences In Six Months, Transferred To Family Court

Additional District and Sessions Judge Ravi Kumar Diwakar, who awarded 23 death sentences in 11 cases between April and September 2026, has been transferred from a fast-track court to a family court in Muzaffarnagar, Uttar Pradesh.

Under an Allahabad High Court transfer order, Diwakar has been appointed Additional Principal Judge of the family court. Judge Shiv Kumari will take over as the Additional District and Sessions Judge at the fast-track court.

The transfer comes after Diwakar questioned the withdrawal of 97 part-heard criminal cases, including murder cases and other serious offences, from his court through administrative orders issued by the then Muzaffarnagar District and Sessions Judge in August.

23 death sentences in six months

Diwakar awarded 22 death sentences in 10 cases during the first four months of his posting in Muzaffarnagar, beginning in April 2026. The cases involved murders committed between 1999 and 2019, with several described by the court as falling within the “rarest of rare” category.

Among the cases, three accused were sentenced to death on April 6 for the 2019 kidnapping and murder of lawyer Mohammad Sameer over a monetary dispute involving Rs 45 lakh. On April 28, a woman and her three sons were sentenced to death in another 2019 murder case.

On May 30, Rahis, 50, was sentenced to death for the 2011 murder of Rajesh Devi and her six-year-old son Himanshu. The prosecution alleged that he took them to a sugarcane field and killed them by repeatedly striking them with bricks.

In July, the judge awarded death sentences in three separate cases, including the murder of a home guard, a 2010 murder linked to panchayat election rivalry and the 2011 murder of a farmer during an attempted robbery.

In August, four men were sentenced to death for the 2014 murder of Pawan Kumar in Shamli, while Shahnawaz received the death penalty for kidnapping and murdering wood trader Saleem for ransom in a case dating back to 1999.

Diwakar awarded his 23rd death sentence on September 7, sentencing Nadeem to death for burning his 23-year-old wife, Shahzadi, alive.

The judge held that Nadeem deliberately poured kerosene on Shahzadi and set her on fire. She suffered approximately 98 per cent burns. The judge held that the killing was deliberate and pre-planned and that the aggravating circumstances outweighed the mitigating circumstances.

The death sentences awarded by the trial court are not immediately executable and require confirmation by the Allahabad High Court.

97 part-heard cases withdrawn

On August 18, the then Muzaffarnagar district judge issued administrative orders recalling 97 pending criminal case files from Diwakar's fast-track court. The cases included murder and other serious offences punishable with death or life imprisonment and were placed before the district judge for disposal in accordance with law.

The move followed Diwakar's series of death penalty verdicts, although the transfer of the cases did not, by itself, establish misconduct on his part or establish that his sentencing record was the formal reason for the administrative action. Muzaffarnagar District Bar Association president Pramod Tyagi described the movement of the cases as a routine administrative exercise, while acknowledging apprehensions among lawyers and litigants following the death penalty verdicts.

In a subsequent 35-page judgement acquitting an accused in a nearly decade-old case under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, Diwakar questioned the legality of withdrawing cases in which hearings had already commenced.

Referring to the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, he questioned whether the district judge could recall part-heard cases through administrative orders without recording reasons.

He also questioned whether a judicial officer was required to comply with an administrative direction considered contrary to law or issued without jurisdiction.

“Power must be accompanied by responsibility and discretion,” Diwakar observed, warning that unchecked authority could lead a person to consider themselves above the law and morality.

‘I would rather die than be called a coward judge’

Diwakar expressed his objections publicly in his September 7 judgement sentencing Nadeem to death. He said he had been “deeply hurt and saddened” by the withdrawal of the cases and alleged that serious criminal matters had been removed from his court to benefit “mafias/gangsters/criminals”.

The judge also alleged that he had received a message from a gangster in western Uttar Pradesh threatening to have his court changed or his transfer effected if he pursued certain cases or commented on the matter.

“I would rather die than be called a coward judge,” he said, adding that he would have no right to remain in the judiciary if he became afraid of such forces and would rather resign.

In the 38-page judgement, Diwakar said he knew the “complete reason” behind the withdrawal of the cases but would not disclose everything, citing the dignity of his office. He maintained that as long as he occupied the judge's chair, the authority to decide cases remained with him.

He also directed that a copy of the judgement be sent to the Uttar Pradesh Chief Secretary and suggested that, in serious sessions cases where the State is the complainant, the District Government Counsel (Criminal) should be given an opportunity to present the State's position if case records are transferred without adequate reason, particularly where the transfer could benefit accused persons or influential criminals.

Diwakar had earlier come into the spotlight in 2022 while serving as a civil judge in Varanasi, when he ordered a videographic survey of the Gyanvapi complex.

He began his judicial career as an additional civil judge in Azamgarh in 2009 and has served in several districts, including Sultanpur, Budaun, Varanasi, Bareilly and Chitrakoot, before being posted to Muzaffarnagar in November 2025.

The latest transfer moves him from the fast-track court to the family court. The transfer order does not establish that his death penalty verdicts or his objections to the withdrawal of the 97 cases were the reason for his reassignment.

Source: lawbeat.in, Salil Tiwari, October 26, 2026

"One is absolutely sickened, not by the crimes that the wicked have committed,
but by the punishments that the good have inflicted."
— Oscar Wilde

Death Penalty News For a World without the Death Penalty