Consensual Relationship That Later Turns Sour Is Not Rape: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Breach of Promise Case Double Presumption of Innocence Applies; No Interference Unless Trial Court Judgment Is Perverse: Allahabad High Court in Murder Appeal Under BNSS A Single Act of Corruption Warrants Dismissal – 32 Years of Service Offers No Immunity: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds ASI’s Removal Suit Against Trustee Without Charity Commissioner’s Consent Is Statutorily Barred: Bombay High Court Government Can't Deny Implied Surrender After Refusing to Accept Possession: Madras HC Clarifies Scope of Section 111(f) of TP Act Custodial Interrogation Must Prevail Over Pre-Arrest Comfort in Hate Speech Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail for Provocative Remarks Against Migrants Mutation Order Without Notice Cannot Stand in Law: Orissa High Court Quashes Tahasildar's Rejection for Violating Natural Justice Cruelty Must Be Grave and Proven – Mere Allegations of Disobedience or Demand for Separate Residence Don’t Justify Divorce: Jharkhand High Court Rejects Husband’s Divorce Appeal Retaliatory Prosecution Cannot Override Liberty: Himachal Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in PMLA Case Post CBI Trap of ED Officer Illegal Remand Without Production of Accused Is Not a Technical Lapse, But a Constitutional Breach: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Major NDPS Case Inherent Power Under Section 528 BNSS Not a Substitute for Article 226 When FIR Is Under Challenge Without Chargesheet or Cognizance Order: Allahabad High Court Possession Without Title Is Legally Insubstantial: Gujarat HC Dismisses Appeal By Dairy Cooperative Over Void Land Transfer You Can Prosecute a Former Director, But You Can’t Force Him to Represent the Company: Calcutta High Court Lays Down Clear Limits on Corporate Representation in PMLA Cases Conviction Cannot Rest on Tainted Testimony of Injured Witnesses in Isolation: Bombay High Court Acquits Five in Murder Case One Attesting Witness is Sufficient if He Proves Execution and Attestation of Will as Required by Law: AP High Court Land Acquisition | Delay Cannot Defeat Just Compensation: P&H High Court Grants Enhanced Compensation Despite 12-Year Delay in Review Petitions by Landowners Allegations Implausible, Motivated by Malice: Kerala High Court Quashes Rape Case After Finding Abuse Claims a Counterblast to Civil Dispute Adoptions Under Hindu Law Need No Approval from District Magistrate: Madras High Court Declares Administrative Rejection of Adoptive Birth Certificate as Illegal Findings of Fact Cannot Be Re-Appreciated in an Appeal Under Section 10F Companies Act: Madras High Court Equality Is Not A Mechanical Formula, But A Human Commitment: P&H High Court Grants Visually Impaired Mali Retrospective Promotions With Full Benefits Orissa High Court Rules Notice for No Confidence Motion Must Include Both Requisition and Resolution – Provision Held Mandatory Ashramam Built on Private Land, Managed by Family – Not a Public Religious Institution: Andhra Pradesh High Court Quashes Endowments Notification Cruelty Must Be Proved, Not Presumed: Gujarat High Court Acquits Deceased Husband In 498A Case After 22 Years Trade Dress Protection Goes Beyond Labels: Calcutta High Court Affirms Injunction Over Coconut Oil Packaging Mimicry Mere Filing of Income Tax Returns Does Not Exonerate the Accused: Madras High Court Refuses Discharge to Wife of Public Servant in ₹2 Crore DA Case

Integrity of Judicial Process Paramount," Delhi High Court Discharges Advocate in Contempt Case Involving Fraudulent Document

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court emphasized the sanctity of the judicial process while dealing with a complex case of contempt of court involving the submission of a purportedly fraudulent document. Justices Suresh Kumar Kait and Shalinder Kaur presided over the case, underscoring the vital principle that "Integrity of Judicial Process is Paramount" in their observation.

The case, titled CONT.CAS.(CRL) 7/2022, revolved around a contentious document submitted in a civil suit related to trademark infringement. The document, claimed to be an order from the Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB) and dated 02.03.2016, was later suspected to be fraudulent.

An in-depth investigation into the document's authenticity was ordered by the court. The inquiry, led by the Registrar (Vigilance) and Registrar (Original Side), revealed the absence of any official record of such an order from the IPAB. This revelation brought the integrity of the document, and by extension, the actions of the respondents, under serious scrutiny.

The respondents, particularly respondent No. 1, represented by advocate Mr. Sanjay Aggarwal, tendered an unconditional apology. They explained the circumstances under which they were misled into believing the authenticity of the document. In their ruling, the Justices acknowledged the apology and the circumstances, leading to the discharge of the respondents from the contempt proceedings.

Furthermore, the court directed the Bar Council of Delhi to take appropriate legal action against Mr. Sanjay Aggarwal if found guilty of manufacturing the fraudulent order. This direction highlights the court's commitment to maintaining the sanctity of legal procedures and ensuring accountability within the legal fraternity.

The decision has been lauded by legal experts as a testament to the judiciary's unwavering dedication to upholding justiceand the rule of law. It serves as a stark reminder of the importance of integrity in legal proceedings and the consequences of any attempt to undermine it. The ruling sets a precedent for similar cases, reinforcing the principle that the integrity of the judicial process is of utmost importance.

 

Date of Decision: 16th November 2023

COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION VS VICKY AGGARWAL AND ORS.

Latest Legal News