Non-Compliance With Rule 14 Of NDPS Rules 2022 Regarding Quantitative Test Vitiates Prosecution Case And Renders Detention Illegal: Allahabad High Court Supreme Court Directs Systematic Audit And Institutional Accountability For Safety In Public Spaces Under Article 21 Extra-Judicial Confession Made Before Police Cannot Solely Sustain Preventive Detention: Supreme Court Pre-Trial Incarceration Cannot Masquerade As Punitive Detention When Trial Is Not Imminent: Supreme Court Land Acquisition | Radial ‘Hub-And-Spoke’ Valuation Models For Contiguous Lands Are Legally Unsustainable: Supreme Court Forfeiture Of Earnest Money Deposit Is A Valid Consequence Upon Failure To Pay Balance Sale Consideration Under IBC Liquidation Process: Supreme Court Res Judicata | Suit For Specific Performance Barred If Relief Was Available In Prior Suit For Permanent Injunction And Not Claimed: Supreme Court RERA | Allottee’s Right To Seek Refund Is Absolute And Unqualified, Not Subject To Promoter’s Completion Of Project: Bombay High Court Order 1 Rule 10(2) CPC | Appellate Court Cannot Summarily Reject Addition Of Legal Heirs Based On Unproven Documents Without Reason: Calcutta High Court Order XIV Rule 5 CPC | Trial Court Must Frame Additional Issues Based On Liberty Granted By Supreme Court To Ensure Just Adjudication: Delhi High Court Mere Citation Of Wrong Provision Does Not Invalidate Order If Court Possessed Jurisdiction: Gujarat High Court Injunction Under Order 39 Rules 1 & 2 CPC Cannot Be Granted Over Large Unidentified Tract Of Land Without Establishing Prima Facie Case: Himachal Pradesh High Court Section 125 CrPC | Mere Rejection Of Permanent Alimony Plea In Divorce Proceedings Does Not Bar Claim For Maintenance: Karnataka High Court Section 311 BNSS | Trial Court Has Discretion To Record Evidence In Narrative Form; Accused Cannot Insist On Question-Answer Format: Kerala High Court Section 482 CrPC | Principle Of Parity Cannot Be Invoked To Quash FIR If Allegations Against Accused Are Distinct And Substantiated: Madhya Pradesh High Court Motor Vehicles Act | Tribunal Cannot Grant 'Right Of Recovery' To Insurer Without Evidence Of Policy Violation: Orissa High Court Mere Inadequacy Of Consideration Or Illiteracy Does Not Vitiate Specific Performance Unless Exploitation Is Proved: Madras High Court Contempt Jurisdiction Cannot Be Converted Into Parallel Forum To Enforce Civil Decrees: Punjab & Haryana High Court Order 18 Rule 17 CPC | Reopening Evidence At The Stage Of Arguments Without Compelling Grounds Amounts To Abuse Of Process: Telangana High Court Cannot Circumvent Bail Granted By Supreme Court: Punjab & Haryana High Court Quashes PITNDPS Preventive Detention Order

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"]

Latest Legal News