Non-Compliance with Section 82 Cr.P.C. Renders Proclamation Proceedings Null and Void: P&H High Court Delhi High Court Declines Mandamus to Speaker for Special Assembly Session to Table CAG Reports Doctors Cannot Be Expected to Investigate Victim's Age in the Absence of Prima Facie Doubt: Kerala High Court Quashes Criminal Proceedings Bombay HC Grants Bail to Drunk Driving Accused; Orders Public Awareness Campaign as a Condition Burden of Proof in Declaratory Suits Lies Squarely on the Plaintiffs: Andhra Pradesh High Court Dismisses Second Appeal in Church Property Dispute Rajasthan High Court Puts Mass Transfer Orders of Panchayat Officials on Hold Physical Disabilities Cannot Be Ignored Based on Employment Continuity: Kerala High Court Awards ₹9.62 Lakh to Teacher Suffering Permanent Disability Local Commissioner Appointment is Not a Right, But a Discretionary Power of the Court: P&H HC Allegations of Fraud Insufficient to Bar Arbitration in Trademark Dispute: Madras High Court Section 138 N.I. Act | Failure to Prove Legally Enforceable Debt Leads to Acquittal in Cheque Dishonour Case: Karnataka High Court Deputationists Have No Vested Right to Continue in Borrowing Department: Andhra Pradesh High Court Kerala High Court: Male Children Can't Claim Maintenance Post-Majority Under PWDV Act A Right Once Accrued Cannot Be Retrospectively Barred by Amended Limitation Provisions: Supreme Court Assessment order under Section 153A of the Income Tax Act declared void due to lack of proper authorization and adherence to Section 153C procedures: P&H High Court Criminal Law Cannot Be Used to Convert Civil Disputes Into Criminal Allegations Without Prima Facie Evidence: Supreme Court Quashes Criminal Proceedings in Employer-Employee Dispute Marriage Lasted 3 Days, But Dowry Harassment Proved Beyond Doubt—Conviction Upheld Under Section 498A IPC: Supreme Court Election Petition Dismissed: Petitioner Fails to Establish Locus Standi and Cause of Action: Punjab & Haryana High Court

Supreme Court Dismisses Special Leave Petitions, Expresses 'Pain' Over Counsel's False Statement

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a stern message to legal practitioners, the Supreme Court today dismissed Special Leave Petitions, stating it was "pained at the fact that the learned counsel for the petitioner(s) has given a wrong statement."

The Bench, consisting of Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vikram Nath and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah, addressed the false claim made by the petitioner’s counsel regarding the uploading of a reasoned order by the High Court of Bombay.

The Court had called for a status report from the Registrar General of the High Court based on the counsel's statement. However, the report clarified that the reasoned order had been digitally signed and uploaded in due time. "In that view of the matter, we are pained at the fact that the learned counsel for the petitioner(s) has given a wrong statement," the Court observed.

The Supreme Court was exercising jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution when it decided to dismiss the Special Leave Petitions. "This Court exercises jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution and the Special Leave Petitions are, accordingly, dismissed," the judgment read.

The Court also expressed discontent over the counsel's misconduct, saying such false statements led to "making observations uncalled for the practice of not uploading the reasoned orders in time."

As a result of the false statement, all pending applications related to the case stand disposed of, marking an end to this chapter of legal proceedings.

Date of Decision: 01-09-2023

VIPUL PRAMODCHANDRA SHAH & ANR.  vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTR

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/01-Sep-2023-Vipul_Vs_Parmod_Chandra.pdf"]

Similar News