Bail | Right to Speedy Trial is a Fundamental Right Under Article 21: PH High Court    |     Postal Department’s Power to Enhance Penalties Time-Barred, Rules Allahabad High Court    |     Tenants Cannot Cross-Examine Landlords Unless Relationship is Disputed: Madras High Court    |     NDPS | Conscious Possession Extends to Vehicle Drivers: Telangana High Court Upholds 10-Year Sentence in Ganja Trafficking Case    |     Aid Reduction Of Without Due Process Unlawful: Rajasthan High Court Restores Full Grants for Educational Institutions    |     Assessment of Notional Income in Absence of Proof Cannot Be 'Mathematically Precise,' Says Patna High Court    |     NCLT's Resolution Plan Overrides State Tax Claims: Andhra Pradesh High Court Quashes Demands Against Patanjali Foods    |     An Agreement is Not Voidable if the Party Could Discover the Truth with Ordinary Diligence: Calcutta High Court Quashes Termination of LPG Distributorship License    |     Independent Witnesses Contradict Prosecution's Story: Chhattisgarh High Court Acquit Accused in Arson Case    |     Merely Being a Joint Account Holder Does Not Attract Liability Under Section 138 of NI Act:  Gujarat High Court    |     Higher Court Cannot Reappreciate Evidence Unless Perversity is Found: Himachal Pradesh High Court Refused to Enhance Maintenance    |     Perpetual Lease Allows Division of Property: Delhi High Court Affirms Partition and Validity of Purdah Wall    |     "Party Autonomy is the Backbone of Arbitration: Bombay High Court Upholds Sole Arbitrator Appointment Despite Party’s Attempts to Frustrate Arbitration Proceedings    |     Videography in Temple Premises Limited to Religious Functions: Kerala High Court Orders to Restrict Non-Religious Activities on Temple Premises    |     Past Service Must Be Counted for Pension Benefits: Jharkhand High Court Affirms Pension Rights for Daily Wage Employees    |     'Beyond Reasonable Doubt’ Does Not Mean Beyond All Doubt: Madras High Court Upholds Life Imprisonment for Man Convicted of Murdering Mother-in-Law    |    

"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        

Similar News