MACT | A Minor Cannot Be Treated as a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consensual Love Affair Not Cheating Under IPC Section 417: Madras High Court Acquits Man Despite Paternity Confirmation Review Jurisdiction is an Ant-Hole in a Pigeon-Hol: Madras High Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Order Upholding Arbitral Award on Liquidated Damages Bank Can Freeze Guarantor’s Salary Account to Recover Loan Dues: Kerala High Court Clarifies CPC Exemption Does Not Apply to Banker’s Right Revenue Entry Calling Property ‘Ancestral’ Does Not Create Title: Gujarat High Court Upholds Registered Will in Second Appeal Licensee Cannot Resist Resumption Of Railway Land: Gauhati High Court Upholds Eviction For Amrit Bharat Station Scheme Mere Non-Payment of Business Dues Is Not Cheating: Calcutta High Court Protects Traders from Criminal Prosecution in Purely Civil Dispute Prosecution’s Failure to Prove Age of Prosecutrix Beyond Reasonable Doubt Fatal to POCSO Conviction: Rajasthan High Court No Title, No Right, No Equity: Bombay High Court Demolishes Claim Over Footpath Stall, Imposes ₹5 Lakh Costs for Abuse of Process Section 155(2) Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Complainant From Seeking Magistrate’s Permission: Allahabad High Court Clarifies Law on Non-Cognizable Investigations Un-Retracted Section 108 Statement Is Binding: Delhi High Court Declines to Reopen ₹3.5 Crore Cigarette Smuggling Valuation Section 34 Is Not an Appeal in Disguise: Delhi High Court Upholds 484-Day Extension in IRCON–Afcons Tunnel Arbitration Section 432(2) Cannot Be Rendered Fatuous: Calcutta High Court Reasserts Balance Between Judicial Opinion and Executive Discretion in Remission Matters Termination of Mandate Is Not Termination of Arbitration: Bombay High Court Revives Reference and Appoints Substitute Arbitrator CBI Can’t Prosecute When Bank Suffers No Loss: Andhra Pradesh High Court Discharges Bhimavaram Hospitals Directors in ₹1.5 Crore SBI Case Section 256 CrPC Cannot Be A Shield For An Accused Who Never Faced Trial: Allahabad High Court Restores 8 Cheque Bounce Complaints

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