While reprimanding and imposing cost of ₹1 lakh on a litigant, the Allahabad High Court held that whose case is based on falsehood, has no right to approach the court and can be summarily thrown out at any stage of the litigation.
The single-judge Justice Sanjay Kumar Singh didn't take lightly the trick the litigant tried to play off with the Court and observed that one who comes to the court, must come with clean hands and no material facts should be concealed.
The petition was filed under Section 482 CrPC for the purpose of getting the FIR filed for offences under Section 406 IPC and Section 6 of Dowry Prohibition Act quashed on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties.
Counsel for applicant, on instruction from him, apprised before the Court that the applicants are ready to return the amount of ₹200,000/- which the complainant has incurred but hearing after hearing he kept doging the same.
To this, the Court noted that the applicants kept on playing hide and seek with the court and tried to obtain interim order by hook or crook and when his nefarious design failed, he tried to avoid the Court.
It therefore observed that the applicants have approached the Court with unclean hands.
"By means of this application the applicants have tried to misguide this Court by stating that compromise has been arrived at between the parties, but the fact is that no compromise has been effected as stated by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant. In spite of the undertakings given by the learned counsel for the applicants, on the basis of the instructions of the applicants, it appears that the applicants have no respect to the orders of this Court."
Noting that courts of law are meant for imparting justice between the parties, the Court refused to assist the applicant.
"Since, the applicants have not approached this Court with clean hands and filed false affidavit before this Court that the matter has been compromised, therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence by this Court."
The Court expressed dismay at the fact that more often the process of the court is being abused by unscrupulous litigants to achieve their nefarious design.
It emphasised that judicial process cannot be allowed to become an instrument of oppression or abuse or a means in the process of the Court to subvert justice as Court exercises its jurisdiction, only in furtherance of justice.
The Court mentioned that over the centuries, it has frowned upon litigants, who, with intent to deceive and mislead the courts, initiated proceedings without full disclosure of facts and added that Supreme Court and High Court has time and again taken up the issue.
It then went on to refer to cases such as Chandra Shashi Vs. Anil Kumar Verma [1994] INSC 579 (14 November 1994), Dr. Buddhi Kota Subbarao Vs. Mr. K. Parasaran & Ors [1996] INSC 942 (13 August 1996), M/S Prestige Lights Ltd Vs. State Bank of India [2007] Insc 840 (20 August 2007), Amar Singh Vs. Union of India and others , 2011 Latest Caselaw 396 SC, Kishore Samrite Vs. State of U.P. & Ors., 2012 Latest Caselaw 606 SC,
"Honesty, fairness, purity of mind should be of the highest order to approach the court, failing which the litigant should be shown the exit door at the earliest point of time," the Court held dismissing the application.
Read Order @LatestLaws.com:
Share this Document :Picture Source :
