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

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