Jammu & Kashmir High Court Directs Construction of Overhead Bridge or Underpass on Ring Road for Safe Passage of Villagers    |     Minor Injuries No Bar for Framing Charges Under Section 307 IPC if Intent to Kill is Present: Supreme Court    |     Prosecution's Case Full of Glaring Doubts:  Supreme Court Overturns Conviction in Abduction and Murder Case    |     Allegations of Dowry Demand in FIR Found Vague and Driven by Civil Property Dispute: Supreme Court Quashes FIR and Chargesheet in Dowry-Cruelty Case    |     Local Police Failed to Perform its Duties: SC Directs New Investigating Officer in Property Dispute    |     Paternity Established Through SSC and Appointment Order, Legal Obligation to Maintain Unmarried Daughter: Andhra Pradesh High Court    |     No Appeal Shall Be Heard Without Disputed Tax Deposit: Bombay High Court Upholds Constitutionality of Section 96(b) of the Cantonment Act, 2006    |     Parties Must Choose Peace Over Litigation: Calcutta High Court Denies FIR Quashing in Family Dispute, Highlights Mediation Option    |     Punjab & Haryana High Court Quashes Recruitment of 1091 Assistant Professors and 67 Librarians In Punjab Due to Procedural Flaws    |     Res Judicata Bars Reconsideration of Adoption Validity in Second Round of Litigation: Jammu & Kashmir High Court    |     Candidates who use a party’s symbol must be deemed members of that party: Kerala High Court Upholds Disqualification for Defection    |     Inconsistencies in Eyewitness Accounts and Lack of Forensic Certainty Lead to Acquittal: Himachal Pradesh High Court Acquits Accused in Murder Case    |     Delhi High Court Quashes Reassessment Notices Under Section 148 Due to Invalid Sanction by JCIT    |     Summons Under PMLA for Further Investigation Does Not Infringe Right Against Self-Incrimination: Telangana HC    |     Termination During Probation Is Lawful if Concealment of Criminal Case Is Proven: Allahabad HC    |     Disproportionate Fine Cannot Be Imposed for Recovery of 1 Liter of Country-made Liquor: Patna High Court    |     Prosecution failed to prove identity of remains and establish murder beyond reasonable doubt: Orissa High Court Acquit Ex-Husband    |     Despite 12 Injuries on the Victim, No Intention to Kill Found: Rajasthan High Court Upholds Conviction Under Section 304 Part-II IPC    |     Governor’s sanction suffers from non-application of mind: Karnataka High Court Stays Governor’s Sanction for Investigation Against CM Siddaramaiah    |    

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