Non-Production Of Case Property And Missing Link Evidence In Seizure Cases Vitiates Prosecution: Himachal Pradesh High Court Employees Compensation Act | Death Due To Cardiac Arrest During Employment Is An 'Accident' Arising Out Of Stress And Strain Of Duty: J&K High Court Transfer Of Proceedings | Courts Must Issue Fresh Notice To Parties Even If They Had Appeared Before The Transferor Court: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Ex-Parte Award Section 80P(4) IT Act Does Not Deny Deduction To Regional Rural Banks As They Retain The 'Deemed Co-operative Society' Status Under Section 22 RRB Act: Madras High Court Property Purchased In Name Of Child For Family Benefit Is Not A 'Benami Transaction' Under Section 2(9) Of The 1988 Act: Madhya Pradesh High Court Person Without Caveatable Interest Cannot Challenge Will Or Seek Revocation Of Probate: Madras High Court Divorce | Cruelty Must Be Assessed By Cumulative Effect Of Matrimonial Conduct Rather Than Isolated Incidents: Orissa High Court Merely Labeling Insurance Policy As Comprehensive Does Not Create Unlimited Liability: MP High Court Order VII Rule 11 CPC | Plaint Must Be Rejected If Limitation Bar Is Apparent From Face Of Pleadings: Patna High Court Limitation Act | 'Sufficient Cause' Cannot Be Used To Revive Stale Or Dead Claims By State: Orissa High Court Quashes Order Condoning 53-Year Delay Employee Cannot Remain Dormant Like Rip Van Winkle & Awaken At Convenience: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dismisses Stale Service Plea With ₹25K Cost Section 29 NDPS Act | Mere Allegation Of 'Cooperation' Without Specific Overt Acts Cannot Sustain Charge Of Conspiracy: Rajasthan High Court Forest Land Status Does Not Extinguish Private Civil Title: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Decree For Possession Once Admitted In Evidence, Document Cannot Be De-Marked On Grounds Of Insufficiency Of Stamp Duty: Telangana High Court Section 190 BNSS | Mere Presence In Unlawful Assembly With Active Intent Renders Member Vicariously Liable For Homicidal Act: Punjab & Haryana High Court Contributory Negligence Under Motor Vehicles Act Cannot Be Inferred Without Cogent Evidence: Telangana High Court Enhances Compensation Motor Vehicles Act | Section 164 Compensation Of Rs. 5 Lakhs Applicable Even To Pending Claims Arising Prior To 2019 Amendment: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consumer Protection Act | Builder Liable To Pay Interest For Delayed Possession Despite Force Majeure Plea If Agreement Executed Post-Outbreak: State Commission

Refused To Quash FIR Against Advocates: In District Judge Application Case: Karnataka HC

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Karnataka High Court has dismissed a criminal petition seeking to quash proceedings in the charge sheet filed against an advocate for allegedly furnishing false information in his application for the post of District Judge.

Justice M. Nagaprasanna, presiding over the matter, emphasized the gravity of the accusation, stating, “The petitioner has deliberately suppressed the cases that were pending against him, therefore, it amounts to seeking to secure employment on account of misrepresentation.” This statement underlines the court’s stringent stance on maintaining honesty and integrity in the judicial selection process.

The case (Criminal Petition No.1644 of 2022) involved the petitioner, an advocate by profession, who was accused of failing to disclose his involvement in past criminal and civil proceedings while applying for the District Judge position. The court observed that such non-disclosure, especially by a practicing lawyer with substantial experience, cannot be overlooked.

The judgment went further to clarify the interpretation of Section 420 of the IPC, relating to cheating, in the context of judicial appointments. The court highlighted, “In cases where fraud and misrepresentation form the foundation for securing employment, can in a given case, be brought under the umbrella of the ingredients of cheating.”

In dismissing the petition, the court reinforced the critical nature of transparency and truthfulness in applications for judicial positions. The judgment serves as a precedent, emphasizing the high ethical standards expected from legal practitioners and the serious consequences of any deviation.

Justice Nagaprasanna also clarified that the observations made in the order are solely for the consideration of the case under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., and should not influence any ongoing proceedings against the petitioner.

Date of Decision: 18th November 2023

SRI PALAKSHA S.S. VS THE STATE BY VIDHANA SOUDHA P.S.

 

 

Latest Legal News