Fraud Unravels Everything, Even a Supreme Court Judgment: Supreme Court Recalls Its Own Ruling in Land Compensation Dispute

“A judicial order procured by fraud is no judgment at all—it is a nullity in the eyes of law and must be recalled, even if rendered by this Court.” — Supreme Court Sets Aside High Court Ruling and Recalls Its Own Judgment, Holding Fraud Had Subverted the Entire Judicial Process. In an extraordinary verdict, the Supreme Court of India issued a scathing denunciation of fraud perpetrated upon the courts and emphatically held that judicial decisions “obtained by deceit and concealment cannot be allowed to stand.”

The judgment not only set aside the Allahabad High Court’s ruling dated 28 October 2021, but also went a step further in recalling its own decision rendered on 5 May 2022 in Reddy Veerana v. State of U.P., describing it as a decision “vitiated by calculated fraud.”

“This is not merely a case of suppression of material facts; it is a calculated deception practiced to secure an exclusive right in land acquisition compensation by manipulating the judicial process,” the bench observed.

“Fraud Played on the Court Borders on Treachery to Justice”: The Court Finds Reddy Withheld Truth, Misled Judiciary

The dispute centered on compensation for land acquired by NOIDA. Reddy Veerana, who along with Vishnu Vardhan and T. Sudhakar had jointly claimed ownership of the property in prior proceedings, sought and obtained exclusive compensation in a writ petition filed before the High Court.

The Supreme Court noted, “Reddy stood on the shoulders of his co-owners to claim rights before courts for decades, only to jettison them when compensation became ripe for the taking.”

The Court found that Reddy had knowingly failed to implead Vishnu and Sudhakar in the writ proceedings, suppressed the fact that Vishnu had filed a suit challenging Reddy’s title, and relied on documents such as a questionable compromise decree which were never fully adjudicated.

“In a judicial landscape that values consistency and candour, this case strikes a discordant note,” the Court remarked.

It concluded: “An attempt by Reddy to steal a march over Vishnu is clearly discernible which, without reference to anything more, does border on fraud.”

“Merger Doctrine Cannot Protect Orders Tainted by Fraud”: Court Rejects Reddy’s Argument that Earlier Judgment Was Final

Reddy had argued that the High Court’s judgment had merged into the Supreme Court’s earlier decision in Reddy Veerana (2022) and could not now be challenged. The Court resoundingly rejected this contention:

“While the doctrine of merger ensures finality, it cannot be allowed to shield fraud. Fraud is a well-recognised exception. No court will allow its process to be abused in this manner.”

Quoting from A.V. Papayya Sastry v. Government of A.P., the Court reiterated: “A judgment or order obtained by playing fraud on the court is a nullity and non est in the eye of law... It can be challenged in any court, at any time.”

The bench stressed that procedural doctrines like merger “must give way to justice” when foundational dishonesty is unearthed.

“Article 32 Cannot Be a Shelter for Poorly Pleaded Claims”: Supreme Court Dismisses Writ Petition While Allowing Civil Appeal

While the Court allowed Vishnu’s civil appeal and set aside the High Court order, it dismissed the writ petition under Article 32, holding that no prima facie breach of Fundamental Rights had been made out.

Merely invoking Articles 14, 19(1)(g), and 21 was not enough, the Court said:

“It is axiomatic that pleading a fundamental right is not sufficient—one must plead its violation. Bald assertions do not vest jurisdiction under Article 32.”

Referring to D.A.V. College v. State of Punjab and Amrit Lal Berry v. CCE, the Court reiterated that Article 32 jurisdiction cannot be exercised unless a real and immediate violation of a Fundamental Right is shown.

“The Process of Law Cannot Be Weaponised”: Supreme Court Condemns Forum Shopping, Yet Acknowledges Exceptional Circumstances

Though Reddy accused Vishnu of forum shopping by filing a civil suit, a writ petition, a review, and a contempt petition, the Court took a nuanced approach.

“We are conscious of the multiplicity of proceedings initiated by Vishnu,” it said. “But that alone cannot condemn him when the record reveals that his exclusion was premeditated and the process was manipulated.”

The Court observed that had Vishnu not approached this Court, there was a risk that no forum would have entertained his grievance due to the earlier ruling in Reddy Veerana.

“Had we turned away from this deception under the weight of technicalities, it would have been a betrayal of the justice system itself.”

Final Directions: High Court to Decide Compensation Anew, Reddy to Remain Under Restrictions

Calling the litigation history between the parties “unbecoming,” the Supreme Court issued the following consequential directions:

• The impugned High Court order of October 28, 2021 is set aside.

• The judgment in Reddy Veerana (2022) is recalled as a nullity.

• The writ petition is remanded to the High Court for fresh consideration after impleading Vishnu and Sudhakar.

• The Chief Justice of the High Court has been requested to preside over the hearing to ensure final disposal “preferably by the year end.”

• Reddy's properties, already furnished as security, will remain in custody of the Court.

• Interim restraint on Reddy's ability to alienate properties remains in abeyance, subject to cooperation with the High Court.

“Let No Act of Court Harm a Party”: Supreme Court Underscores That Procedural Law Must Aid, Not Obstruct Justice

Dismissing Reddy’s arguments about procedural lapses and registry objections, the Court asserted:

“Processual law is not to be a tyrant but a servant... After all, courts are to do justice, not to wreck this end product on technicalities.”

Quoting from State of Punjab v. Shamlal Murari and M.V. Vali Pero v. Fernandeo Lopez, the Court declared: “Rules of procedure are tools forged to achieve justice and not hurdles to obstruct the pathway to justice.”

This decision sends a powerful signal that fraud and manipulation of judicial forums will not be tolerated, regardless of how procedurally entrenched the outcome may seem.

In a case that began as a land acquisition dispute, the Supreme Court has now reaffirmed fundamental tenets of integrity in judicial process, stating unequivocally:

“Fraud vitiates everything—even a final judgment of this Court.”

Date of Decision: July 23, 2025