Readiness and Willingness Under Section 16(c) Is Not a Ritualistic Phrase — Plaintiff Must Prove It With Substance, Not Just Words: Karnataka High Court FIR in Disproportionate Assets Case Quashed: Patna High Court Slams SP for 'Non-Application of Mind' and 'Absence of Credible Source Information' Ownership of Vehicle Linked to Commercial Quantity of Heroin – Custodial Interrogation Necessary: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 BNSS Death Caused by Rash Driving Is Not a Private Dispute — No FIR Quashing on Basis of Compromise in Section 106 BNS Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court No Bank Can Override Court Orders: Rajasthan High Court Slams Axis Bank for Unauthorized Withdrawal from Court-Ordered FD" Indian Courts Cannot Invalidate Foreign Arbitral Awards Passed Under Foreign Law: Madhya Pradesh High Court Enforces Texas-Based Award Despite Commercial Court’s Contrary Decree Sudden Quarrel over Mound of Earth — Not Murder but Culpable Homicide: Allahabad High Court Eligibility Flows from Birth, Not a Certificate Date: Delhi High Court Strikes Down Rule Fixing Arbitrary Cut-Off for OBC-NCL Certificates in CAPF (AC) Recruitment Bar Under Order II Rule 2 CPC Cannot Be Invoked Where Specific Performance Was Legally Premature Due To Statutory Impediments: P&H High Court Once a Court Declares a Department an Industry Under Section 2(j), State Cannot Raise the Same Objection Again: Gujarat High Court Slams Repetitive Litigation by Irrigation Department “How Could Cheques Issued in 2020 Be Mentioned in a 2019 Contract?”: Delhi High Court Grants Injunction in Forged MOA Case, Slams Prima Facie Fabrication Calling Wife by Her Caste Name in Public Just Before Suicide is Immediate Cause of Self-Immolation: Madras High Court Upholds Husband’s Conviction Under Section 306 IPC Sole Testimony of Prosecutrix, If Credible, Is Enough to Convict: Delhi High Court Upholds Rape Conviction Cheque Issued as Security Still Attracts Section 138 NI Act If Liability Exists on Date of Presentation: Himachal Pradesh High Court No Work No Pay Is Not a Universal Rule: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dock Identification Without Prior TIP Is Absolutely Useless: P&H High Court Upholds Acquittal in Attempt to Murder Case Filing Forged Court Pleadings in Union Government’s Name is Criminal Contempt: Karnataka High Court Sentences Litigant to Jail Execution of Will Proved, But Probate Justly Denied Due to Concealment of Property Sale: Delhi High Court Mere Designation Doesn’t Establish Criminal Liability: Bombay High Court Quashes Proceedings Against ICICI Officials in Octroi Evasion Case Fraud on Power Voids the Order: Supreme Court Quashes FIR Against Karnataka BJP Leader R. Ashoka, Slams Politically Motivated Prosecution Cause of Fire Is Immaterial If Fire Itself Is Insured Peril: Supreme Court Rebukes Insurer’s Repudiation Dragging a Trained Army Officer Up 20 Steps Without Resistance? The Story Lacks Credence: Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal in Army Officer’s Murder Semen Stains Alone Do Not Prove Rape: Supreme Court Acquits Doctor Accused of Rape No Mortgage, No SARFAESI: Supreme Court Rules Against NEDFi, Says Recovery Action in Nagaland Without Security Agreement Was Illegal Parity Cannot Be Denied by Geography: Supreme Court Holds Jharkhand Bound by Patna HC's Judgment, Orders Pay Revision for Industries Officer Once Power Flows Continuously from a Synchronized Turbine, It Is No Longer Infirm: Supreme Court Orders TANGEDCO to Pay Fixed Charges to Penna Electricity

Forum Shopping Cannot Be Tolerated: J&K High Court Quashes Bail for Misrepresentation in SC&ST Case

06 November 2024 7:13 PM

By: Deepak Kumar


High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh at Jammu, under the bench of Justice M.A. Chowdhary, issued a landmark ruling in Anu Bala v. Rajesh Singh & Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir, Bail Application No. 379/2021. The Court cancelled bail previously granted to the accused, Rajesh Singh, citing abuse of court processes, suppression of material facts, and violations of procedural requirements under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

The case stemmed from an FIR filed by Anu Bala, Assistant Director of Fisheries in Jammu, alleging that Rajesh Singh, an Inspector in the Department, verbally and physically abused her, including caste-based insults, thus violating the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The accused was initially granted bail on August 28, 2021, by the Sessions Court without disclosing a pending bail application on the same matter before another court. The complainant filed for cancellation of bail, arguing that the accused had obtained interim bail through misrepresentation and forum shopping.

Forum Shopping and Misrepresentation in Bail Applications: The accused filed multiple bail applications in different courts without disclosing the existence of the first application, which was still pending.

Right of Victim to Be Heard Under SC/ST Act: The Sessions Court granted bail without notifying or hearing the complainant, as mandated by Sections 15-A(3) and 15-A(5) of the SC/ST Act.

Abuse of Judicial Process: The Court condemned the accused's actions as an abuse of judicial process, undermining the integrity of the justice system.

Forum Shopping and Non-Disclosure: Grounds for Cancellation of Bail
The High Court observed that the accused engaged in "forum shopping," or "bench hunting," by filing multiple bail applications before different courts on the same day, attempting to secure favorable interim relief. Citing the Supreme Court’s precedents in State of Maharashtra v. Pankaj Gagshi Gangar and Vijay Kumar Ghai v. State of West Bengal, the Court condemned this practice as a "disreputable" tactic that pollutes the judicial process.

“Forum shopping has been termed as a disreputable practice by the Courts and has no sanction and paramountcy in law,” stated the Court [Para 24].

The Court emphasized that litigants are required to approach the judiciary with "clean hands" and must fully disclose relevant facts, especially in bail proceedings. The accused’s failure to disclose the pending bail application before another court constituted "misrepresentation and suppression of facts," justifying the cancellation of bail.

The High Court highlighted the mandatory requirement under Sections 15-A(3) and 15-A(5) of the SC/ST Act to notify and allow the victim to be heard in bail proceedings involving atrocities against Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. The Court criticized the Sessions Court for granting bail without ensuring compliance with these provisions.

“The statutory provisions, which have been enacted by Parliament as a measure of protecting the constitutional rights of persons belonging to the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, must be complied with and enforced conscientiously,” the Court remarked, citing Hariram Bhambi v. Satyanarayan [Para 25].

The Court observed that non-compliance with Section 15-A amounted to a procedural irregularity that rendered the initial grant of bail unsound.

Justice Chowdhary underscored the responsibility of the judiciary to safeguard the fairness and integrity of judicial proceedings, especially in cases under the SC/ST Act, which protect marginalized communities. The Court noted that the accused’s actions and the Sessions Court's oversight in failing to involve the complainant violated fundamental principles of justice.

“No litigant should be allowed to pollute the pure stream of justice in any manner,” the Court observed, ordering the cancellation of bail [Para 29].

The High Court quashed the bail order dated November 8, 2021, granted by the Sessions Court, and directed the accused, Rajesh Singh, to surrender to the trial court by November 11, 2024. The Court allowed the accused to apply for fresh bail but directed the trial court to consider any new application independently, without being influenced by the current judgment.
 

Date of Decision: 04 Novemer 2024

Latest Legal News