The Allahabad HC recently invoked the clean hand doctrine and canceled the bail application of the accused as the bail was taken by suppressing the facts.
A single judge bench of Hon’ble Justice Krishan Pahal held that the party claiming any relief has to come with clean hands and any order taken by suppressing facts is bad and cannot be sustained.
Brief Facts:
The instant bail cancellation application has been filed on behalf of the applicant (complainant) with the prayer to cancel the bail granted to opposite party no. 2 by the court concerned in Case Crime No. 520 of 2020 under Sections 147, 420, 467, 468, 471, 387, 447, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station George Town, District Prayagraj.
Contentions of the Applicant:
Learned counsel for the applicant stated that after lodging of the FIR, the final report (charge sheet) was submitted by the investigating agency on 25.1.2021 and the cognizance was taken on 2.2.2021. The applicant challenged the said charge sheet and the order of cognizance by filing a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. as Application No. 10351 of 2021 before this Court and it was dismissed on merits vide order dated 6.10.2021.
Learned counsel has next stated that the said order has been granted as the opposite party no. 2 has played fraud with the court, as such, is a nullity. No sanctity can be accorded to the said order as the first order on merits passed by this Court on the second anticipatory bail application of the applicant dated 1.11.2021 was taken by keeping the court in dark about the fact that the final report (charge sheet) had already been filed.
Observations of the Court:
This Court relied on the clean hands doctrine which states that one “who comes into equity must come with clean hands.” This doctrine requires the court to deny equitable relief to a party having violated good faith with respect to the subject of the claim. The purpose of the doctrine, as elucidated in Colby Furniture Company, Inc. v. Belinda J. Overton 299 So.3d 259 is to prevent a party from obtaining relief when that party’s own wrongful conduct has made it such that granting the relief would be against equity and good conscience.
The Court noted the fact that the third anticipatory bail application was allowed by the concerned court on 25.2.2022 by taking into consideration the fact that the applicant was on anticipatory bail till the submission of final report (charge sheet) and has not misused it. In view of this Court, the third anticipatory bail itself being based on the second anticipatory bail order dated 1.11.2021 is itself bad in the eyes of law, as such, it cannot be sustained. The said orders dated 1.11.2021 and 25.2.2022 are whimsical and perverse. Any order taken by suppressing facts is bad and cannot be sustained. As the very foundation is weak, any subsequent order based on it also cannot be accorded any sanctity and is also unsustainable. The judgements referred by learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 do not apply to the present case as he has not come to the court with clean hands and has taken the orders by concealing the facts, as such, the order dated 25.2.2022 is set aside and quashed.
The decision of the Court:
The Allahabad HC cancelled the bail application as the opposite party fail to come up with clean hands to seek a bail.
Case Title: Smt. Shanti Rani Agarwal vs State of UP and another
Coram: Hon’ble Justice Krishan Pahal
Case no.: CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL CANCELLATION APPLICATION No. - 172 of 2022
Advocate for the Applicant: Ashish Kumar Singh,Imran Ullah
Advocate for the Respondent: - G.A.,Nand Lal Pandey,Suyash Pandey
Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com
Picture Source :