Supreme Court Lays Down Comprehensive Guidelines To Prevent Misuse Of POCSO Act In Matrimonial Disputes Land Reforms Act | Joint Application For Pre-Emption By Adjoining Landowners Is Maintainable: Calcutta High Court Ocular Evidence In Conflict With Medical Findings Or Withholding Of Natural Witnesses Vitiates Prosecution Case: Allahabad High Court Compassionate Appointment Claim Must Be Decided Based On Policy Prevalent At Time Of Death: Bombay High Court Section 376 IPC | Failure To Prove Initial Dishonest Intent In Marriage Promise Renders Sexual Relationship Consensual: Allahabad High Court Prolonged Incarceration And Delay In Trial Are Valid Grounds To Invoke Constitutional Right To Speedy Trial Under Article 21 In UAPA Cases: Delhi High Court Motor Vehicles Act | Insurer Liable To Pay And Recover Compensation For Gratuitous Passengers In Goods Vehicles: Gujarat High Court Proof Of Demand And Acceptance Under PC Act Must Be Evaluated Based On Preponderance Of Probabilities In Rebuttal: Kerala High Court Tenancy Claim | Mere Possession Without Lawful Foundation Or Identification Of Tenanted Land Cannot Confer Occupancy Rights: Karnataka High Court 125 CrPC | Maintenance Cannot Be Evaded By Claiming Physical Disability If Conduct Indicates Concealment Of Financial Means: Kerala High Court M.P. Municipal Corporation Act | Locus Standi Under Section 307(5) Limited To Residents Of The Municipal Area: Madhya Pradesh High Court Writ Jurisdiction | Belated Challenge To Disciplinary Action After Superannuation Amounts To Laches; Petition Dismissed: Punjab & Haryana High Court Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 CPC | Mere Pendency Of Partition Suit Does Not Entitle Plaintiff To Injunction Restraining Reconstruction Of Residential Building: Kerala High Court

"Abuse and Misuse of Legal Process Require Stern Action," Says Supreme Court in Dismissing Petitions with Rs. 3 Lakhs Cost

05 September 2024 5:42 AM

By: Admin


In a recent order, the Supreme Court of India issued a stern warning against the abuse and misuse of legal proceedings. The bench, comprised of Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vikram Nath and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal, dismissed three petitions filed by the same petitioner, imposing costs of Rs. 3 Lakhs to be deposited with the Gujarat High Court Advocates Association for welfare activities.

"We are thus of the view that such abuse and misuse of the process of law require to be dealt with firmly," observed the bench, sending a strong message against frivolous litigations and unwarranted delays in trial proceedings.

The petitioner, an accused in a case dating back to 1996 under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, and the Indian Penal Code, 1860, was found to have delayed the trial for about 25-26 years. The judgment noted that the petitioner filed multiple petitions, not only before the High Court but also the Supreme Court, to "somehow or the other stall the trial."

The Court remarked that both the Trial Court and the High Court had exercised due judicial discretion in rejecting meritless interlocutory applications filed by the petitioner. "We do not find any infirmity in the orders passed by the High Court," stated the bench.

The Court also made it clear that the cost imposition was a step toward curbing such abuses. "Accordingly, we dismiss all the three petitions with cost of Rs.1 Lakh each i.e. total of Rs.3 Lakhs to be deposited within four weeks from today," the bench added.

Legal experts see this as a landmark judgment that could act as a deterrent against the misuse of judicial resources and incessant delays in court proceedings. The decision is also viewed as a push towards judicial efficiency and a fair trial within a reasonable timeframe.

The case had garnered attention due to its prolonged history and the Court's final decision is seen as upholding the sanctity of the judicial process in India.

Date of Decision: 03-10-2023

SANJIV KUMAR RAJENDRABHAI BHATT  vs THE STATE OF GUJARAT        

Latest Legal News