Second Appeal is Not a Forum for Rehearing or Reassessment of Evidence: Andhra Pradesh High Court Dismisses Partition Suit Appeal Failure of Justice Must Be Proved, Not Assumed: Calcutta High Court Upholds Murder Conviction Despite Charge Framing Lapse Bail is the Rule, Refusal is an Exception – Right to Liberty Cannot Be Ignored: Delhi High Court Grants Bail to Ivory Coast National in NDPS Case Courts Must Adopt a Justice-Oriented Approach in Matrimonial Cases: Gauhati High Court Condones Delay in Family Court Appeal FIR Quashing | Breath Analyzer Test Alone Cannot Prove Alcohol Consumption: Patna High Court Quashes FIR Under Bihar Prohibition Law Unregistered Writing Cannot Confer Ownership: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dismisses Second Appeal in Partition Dispute Allegations of Stalking and Criminal Intimidation Must Be Tested at Trial: Gujarat High Court Refuses to Quash FIR Bombay High Court Quashes Criminal Case Against Nestlé Officials Over Maggi Noodles Controversy No Shortcuts in NDPS Investigations – J&K High Court Rebukes Casual Approach of Investigating Officers Sessions Court Cannot Order Re-Investigation: Allahabad High Court Quashes Direction Against Jaypee Hospital If Official Witnesses Are Reliable, Independent Corroboration Is Not a Must:  Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds NDPS Conviction No Service Tax Can Be Levied on Sale of Lottery Tickets: Supreme Court Rules That Lottery Distributors Are Not Agents Courts Cannot Be Silent Spectators When Justice Is Denied Due to Procedural Errors:  Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Recall of Bail Rejection Order Section 27 of the Evidence Act Requires Independent Corroboration—Mere Claims by Police Are Not Enough: Supreme Court on Flawed Investigation Confession to Police Is No Confession in Law: Supreme Court Acquits Man, Citing Inadmissibility of Statements Made in Custody Mere 'Last Seen Together' Is Not Enough for Conviction Unless It Forms a Complete Chain of Circumstantial Evidence: Supreme Court Sets Aside Life Sentence in 16-Year-Old Girl’s Murder Failure to Explain Wife’s Death Strengthens Guilt Under Section 106 of Evidence Act" – Supreme Court Restores Conviction in Murder Case Child Witness Testimony Cannot Be Discarded Solely on Grounds of Tutoring: Supreme Court Restores Conviction in Murder Case

A Glaring Example of How Unscrupulous Litigants Abuse and Misuse the Process of Law: Supreme Court Dismisses Petition and Imposes Costs

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Supreme Court of India, in a recent Order, lambasted the abuse and misuse of legal process, describing it as "a glaring example of how unscrupulous litigants abuse and misuse the process of law." The bench, comprising Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vikram Nath and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal, dismissed a Special Leave Petition (Criminal) filed by Sarita Kumari against the State of U.P. & Anr. The court-imposed costs amounting to Rs. 50,000/-, to be deposited within four weeks.

The First Information Report in the present case was lodged back in 2007. The police report under section 173(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) was submitted in June 2008. The trial had reached an advanced stage with the examination of all prosecution witnesses and commencement of final arguments. The petitioner, Sarita Kumari, failed to appear during this critical phase, leading to the issuance of a non-bailable warrant against her. "At this stage, after 16 years of the lodging of the FIR and at the fag end of the trial, the petitioner filed a petition under section 482 CrPC for quashing the proceedings of the Sessions Trial," the judgment noted.

Justice Vikram Nath, speaking for the bench, sternly noted that the conduct of the petitioner is a classic example of abuse of legal process. The judgment observed, "Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, as already recorded in the opening paragraph, we deem it appropriate to dismiss the said petition with costs which we quantify at Rs. 50,000/-."

The court directed that this amount should be deposited with the Supreme Court Advocates on Record Association Welfare Fund and specified that proof of such deposit must be submitted to the Registry within six weeks, failing which the matter will be listed for further orders.

The court's strong stance is seen as a signal to litigants and lawyers alike that the abuse and misuse of the judicial process will not be tolerated and would be met with financial penalties.

The judgment has set a precedent that underscores the importance of judicious use of the legal process and the consequences that unscrupulous litigants might have to face for any misuse.

This case serves as a stern reminder that the Court's time is valuable and should not be wasted by those seeking to manipulate the system for personal gains.

Date of Decision: 03-10-2023

SARITA KUMARI  vs STATE OF U.P. & ANR.                   

Similar News