obtaining stays and injunctions from the Courts by frivolous litigation by making false statements

Bombay High Court first time exercising powers conferred under section 340 of Cr. P.C. punishes Husband for making false statement in Affidavit under section 195 of Indian penal Code

“The guidelines of Supreme Court as followed in Sanjeev Mittal’s case 2011 RCR (CRI) (7) 2111 is need of the time. It is necessary to pen down the class of people who perpetuate illegal acts by obtaining stays and injunctions from the Courts by frivolous litigation by making false statements – one of the reasons for over-flowing of court dockets is the frivolous litigation – It has unfortunately become the order of the day, for false statements to be made in the course of judicial proceedings even on oath and attempts made to substantiate these false statements through affidavits or fabricated documents -Even if these litigants ultimately loose the lis, they become the real victors and have the last laugh. This class of people who perpetuate illegal acts by obtaining stays and injunctions from the Courts must be made to pay the sufferer not only the entire illegal gains made by them as costs to the person deprived of his right and also must be burdened with exemplary costs. Faith of people in judiciary can only be sustained if the persons on the right side of the law do not feel that even if they keep fighting for justice in the Court and ultimately win, they would turn out to be a fool since winning a case after 20 or 30 years would make wrong doer as real gainer, who had reaped the benefits for all those years. Thus, it becomes the duty of the Courts to see that such wrong doers are discouraged at every step – Despite settled legal positions, the obvious wrong doers, use one after another tier of judicial review mechanism as a gamble, knowing fully well that dice is always loaded in their favour, since even if they lose, the time gained is the real gain .

It is very necessary at least in a few glaring cases that an example be made of persons who are indulging in such malpractices which undermine the very administration of justice dispensation system and the working of the Courts. This will at least have a deterrent effect on others.

A party, whether he is a petitioner or a respondent, or a witness, has to respect the solemnity of the proceedings in the court and he cannot play with the courts and pollute the stream of justice. It is cases like this, with false claims (or false defences) which load the courts, cause delays, consume judicial time and bring a bad name to the judicial system. This case is a sample where the facts are glaring. Even if they were not so glaring, once falsehood is apparent, to not take action would be improper.

The judicial system has a right and a duty to protect itself from such conduct by the litigants and to ensure that where such conduct has taken place, the matter is investigated and reaches its logical conclusion and depending on the finding which is returned in such proceedings, appropriate punishment is meted out.

Unless the judicial system protects itself from such wrongdoing by taking cognizance, directing prosecution, and punishing those found guilty, it will be failing in its duty to render justice to the citizens. Litigation caused by false claims and defences will come to be placed before the courts, load the dockets and delay delivery of justice to those who are genuinely in need of it.

What constitutes the offence – the first offence was of forging the document and then using it before Court in order to cause injury to the other party -Two offences are separate and are to be prosecuted and tried separately – when the present petition containing false averments and relying on forged documents (which were also filed) was filed, a second offence stood committed That second offence was of: (1) making a false averment in the petition duly verified and filing the same in court; and (2) asking the Court for a judgment on the basis of false averments and forged documents.“

this is the first time in the history of Bombay High Court that an order has been passed under the provisions of section 340 of the Criminal Procedure Code directing an enquiry against the accused in anticipatory bail matter.

The abrogation of Article 35-A

The article is basically an agreement reached between New Delhi and Srinagar in 1952, added to the Constitution through a presidential order of 1954, according to which no one except the permanent residents will be able to settle permanently in the state, acquire immovable property, avail government jobs, scholarships and Article 35A of the Constitution empowers the Jammu and Kashmir Assembly to define the state’s permanent residents and their privileges. petitions have been filed by NGO on grounds that it was illegally added to the Constitution as it was never floated before Parliament.

Direction of supreme court in using of A4 size paper

It is notified for the information of all concerned that the Competent Authority has been pleased to direct that :

With a view to bring uniformity about use of paper & printing thereon and to minimize consumption of paper & consequently to save the environment, superior quality A4 size paper (29.7 cm x 21 cm) having not less than 75 GSM with printing on both sides of the paper with Font – Times New Roman, Font size 14, in one and half line spacing (for quotations and indents – font size 12 in single line spacing), with margin of 4 cm on left & right and 2 cm on top & bottom, shall be used in the pleadings, petitions, affidavits or other documents to be filed in this Court;
in conformity with the provisions of Order LIII, Rule 2 of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013, all communications from the Registry of this Court shall only be sent to the concerned Advocates-on-Record through e-mail followed by an SMS alert on the registered mobile number of the Advocate-on-Record and thereafter the practice of sending the communication through hard copy shall be discontinued by the Registry;
the Filing Counter of the Registry, following the existing procedure with respect to fresh matters, may accept the Misc. Applications, Review Petitions, Curative Petitions and Contempt Petitions in disposed of matters as 1 +1 (1 set of original papers + 1 paperbook) and after the defects are cured, rest of the paperbooks shall be filed by the advocates/parties- in-person; and
a common index shall be placed in the first volume in case there are more than one volume in a matter and a separate index of each volume shall be placed in the respective volume(s).
The directions at Sl.Nos. (i) and (ii) shall come into force with effect from 1st April, 2020 and directions at Sl.Nos. (iii) and (iv) with immediate effect.

Supreme Court of India

[Circular dt. 12-03-2020]

Karnataka High Court Rules using of A4 size paper

Every memorandum of appeal, petition, affidavit interlocutory application or other memorandum or list presented to or filed in the High Court (other than original documents) shall be fairly and legible written, typed or printed or partly so written,  partly typed or partly printed on strong and durable White paper of metric A-4 size (30.5 cms long and 21.5 cms wide) weighing with minimum 75 gsm, Font style-Verdana, Font size of the title – 14″ bold single line, Font size of the text – 12″, left margin 1.75″, right margin 1″, top margin 1.5″ & bottom margin 1.5″. The writing, typing and printing shall be made on single side of the paper with double line spacing and every set of papers shall be stitched bookwise with pages serially numbered and be provided with an index; the index shall be on paper of the same size and strength mentioned above and shall stitched as the first sheet of the papers.

Facebook and Information Technology Law

The Indian constitution did not gave us the privilege or to all its citizens under the category of “fundamental rights” to spread “communal violence” or “the right to speech” or the right of “expression” by hurting the emotions of others.

A general comment of “deeds” and “misdeeds” or “negligence” or “Tort” should be expressed in a prudent and judicious manner, and should be consistent to a particular issue.. Where no individual’s personal sentiments should be damaged. In another words in India it is said “that the beggar has his choice” Each and every one is free to enjoy/live his life under a blanket of legal sanction.

We have no right to demeanor a person in connection with his “profession” “choice” or “living style” if we can’t add  respect to his living style  we have no right to comment also . if someone is doing so …. Or invading the peace and tranquility of a private person through “Facebook” or other electronic media he will be prosecuted by the law …

Why we use face book?

Facebook is a social media and it’s equivalent to remain in a social group, where you are well acquainted with your friends and relatives….or to whom you know well and familiar with or to pass a communication to the group at a large where your activities are carrying on day to day basis.. Some are using this domain for their business and promotion for the profession that is a separate concept..

But unfortunately some people even without thinking the consequences using this domain for alleging personnel vengeance or rage against a person or against a group of people or society or spread the heartedness among the religion of the people at large… which become disastrous and divesting the peace.

  “Whoever by means of any communication device or computer cheats by impersonating someone else, shall be punished with imprisonment up to three years and shall be liable to pay a fine of one Lakh Rupees is according to   section 66D of the information Technology Ac Act,

2. Liability of Facebook to remove the posting:

Section 79(3)(b) in The Information Technology Act, 2000

(b) upon receiving notice by the Government or its agency if the  data or communication link residing in or connected to a computer resource, controlled by the intermediary like Facebook or Twitter or any other sites  is being used to commit the unlawful act, and they failed to expeditiously remove or disable access to that

Material then it would be held criminally responsible for the act and be liable for punishment, along with the individual who has committed the impersonating act, to have committed the offence of impersonation. Facebook subsequently will be unable to invoke the defenses as laid down under section 79 of the Act

3. According to section 67 of the Information Technology Ac Act: restricts publishing of electronic information in any platform which is considered to be obscene

4. “It prohibits any material, which is lascivious, (feeling or revealing an overt sexual interest or desire. For example “he gave her a lascivious wink”) or appeals to the prurient interest, or if its effect would tend to deprave or corrupt persons who are likely to read, see or hear the matter contained or embodied in it.

After the year  2008 sections 67A and 67B were subsequently added restricting /prohibiting the  publishing or transmitting of material containing sexually explicit acts (depicting children, for example), in electronic form.”…to be contd

privatization of Banking sectors wise decision?

Our top leaders are inviting “private crooks” to run the poor government and to make India much poorer country and preparing to gift India a “crystal clean misery” In Budget 2021, Finance minister M Nirmala Sitharaman had announced the privatization of two PSBs and a general insurance company. Bank employees who feared losing their jobs initiated a two-day strike to oppose the decision.

Rajan’s statement came on the first day of the strike. Have any one ever seen that private banking sector have rendered loan to “agriculture” “farming” etc…. our country is consists of 80 % of agriculture based income people … what is the strategy of the government? To create a “welfare state” or a “corporate” run state? Is a greater question in front of the elite group .In one way government is leaning towards the welfare and the smooth living of the citizens and in another way contrarily to the statement is making them “Hope less” Getting out of the NPA is not the wise solutions to make the banking sector and PSU to “privatization” it should consisntly try to adopt different policy and each and every bank should fallow the same guideline.

For example if xyz loanee is not available loan then he is approaching another Bank for the loan and he is getting successful in availing the loan by hook or crook. Private participation should be there with an accountability of public sector banking’s. Now let’s go back and see what Rajam said on Monday: “I think it would be a colossal mistake to sell the banks to industrial houses. “In the context of the November ‘20 proposal, Rajan’s statement is against selling the PSBs to industrial houses and corporates and not against privatization In a recent time I have encountered with a case in Bangalore at High court of Karnataka the most funniest thing is that some XYZ company had availed a loaned of only six crore to a certain company through a private money lending organization.. unfortunately our legal mechanism and the misery of the loanee is so worst that he has to pay 950 crore along with interest for the 6 crore rupees. It is corporate driven private Banking system…..to be contd..

Justice delayed is Justice denied’, is the quotations of words of William Goldstone

The judiciary parallel branch with the legislature and the executive of government in India’s democratic, Republic and constitutional framework, The role of courts in Democratic India is especially is not merely to prosecute the culprits or the accused persons but to adjudicate the cases between the state Government and the accused persons , parallel the same functions of the Judiciary provides the protection of the rights more fully not only the fundamental and civil rights, but also to protect the rights and liberty of individuals. Once a person is being an accused of an offence “is a accused” Than after the Constitution of India respectfully gives the leverage to exercise the fundamental right to defend himself in the court by appointment of an pleader/Lawyer/Advocate to protect his right ‘for not being inside the confinement or in the jail” if he fails to prove his “innocence” in the lower court again there are provisions of appeal and Revisions etc. in the upper court or in the court of Appeals and in the courts of Revisions, further more if he miserable fails to prove his innocence…. his right of freedom automatically extinguishes….. Meaning the constitutionally provided rights i.e the fundamental rights are ‘presumed to be vanished”
Now the time came to the accused/convict to face the consequence of his ill deed… and he should face the same and the constitution should see/ensure that due to such in action of implementation of its own law other members of the society should not be adversely affected…
Here the good effect of the implementation of law and the inaction of the constitution/judiciary/executive to implementation of same law is taken in to account..
For inaction of non-implementing of the law is not only the incapacity of the “Judiciary “alone but also a legal inefficiency of the “executive” and the legislature altogether.. So this loopholes in Indian democratic should be eradicated..
Justice delayed is Justice denied’, is the quotations of words of William Goldstone is the best examples of the judicial system prevalent in India.
It is pertinent to note that both the Bar and the Bench have an exceedingly contributed to the delays in the settlement of cases. on a broad analysis it is necessary to note that Judiciary is the most high-held organization responsible for the cause of delays , Being an Advocate I would strongly argue that Advocates are also responsible for the delaying the case parallel the judiciary also…
Delaying the justice is denying the justice…
“Justice delayed is justice denied” is a legal maxim meaning that if legal redress is available for a party that has suffered some injury, but is not forthcoming in a timely fashion, it is effectively the same as having no redress at all
For an example:
When dealing with the Nirvaya rape case…. our Judiciary ought to have handle the situation in prompt manner by executing order of “Death Warrant” or else the Deliberating playing with the law of the land to protect the guilt is also an offence.. That is to utilizing the “laws of the land” to protect a convict…. once the accused are convicted under the heinous crimes, automatically the fundamental right is extinguished and they should be treated like a “rotten Meat”.. These four “Rapist should immediately go to hell. By “hanging” or “shooting” or “electrifying” and the persons who are advocating them… and supporting them.. Also they should have a nice seat in Hell.. God bless these filthy souls…with life time hanging with thousand years of blessings in Hell….
I took this profession of law/advocacy by choice but not by “compulsion” or as a “destiny of career and fate”
Hence supporting the general mass of the lawyers is not the motto to support the “immorality ethics of lawyers.”. Law and medicines are the most noble profession in this world…both are the Royal profession beyond comparison.. With other professionals… hence gaining the reputation within a short span of time by doing an immoral act by being a Doctor or a “lawyer is mostly condemnable
Doctors and the lawyers are the positive Icon to the society at a large… we should upkeep our prestige to keep the society clean not only by supporting to eliminating the culprits like Nirbhaya,s rapists but also to support the constitution to eliminate them..

Amendment of the plaint or the written statement under Order VI Rule 17 of CPC

Order VI Rule 17 reads as under:
“17. Amendment of pleadings – The Court may at any stage of the proceedings allow either party to alter or amend his pleadings in such manner and on such terms as may be just, and all such amendments shall be made as may be necessary for the purpose of determining the real questions in controversy between the parties:

Provided that no application for amendment shall be allowed after the trial has commenced, unless the Court comes to the conclusion that in spite of due diligence, the party could not have raised the matter before the commencement of trial.”

pleadings can be amended on the basis of necessary for the purpose of determining the real questions in controversy between the parties but it should not be allowed on the basis of inconvenient or injustice done to the opposite parties..

the main points to be considered before a party is allowed to amend his pleading are: firstly, whether the amendment is necessary for determination of the real question in controversy; and secondly, can the amendment be allowed without injustice to the other side. Thus, it has been held that where amendment is sought to avoid multiplicity of suits, or where the parties in the plaint are wrongly described, or where some properties are omitted from the plaint by inadvertence, the amendment should be allowed.
Justice P. Sathasivam, and Justice J. Chelameswar of Supreme Court of India in the case of Ramesh kumar Agarwal vs Rajmala Exports P.Ltd.& Ors.The court discussed the principles governing the Amendment of pleadings and held that “It is clear that while deciding the application for amendment ordinarily the Court must not refuse bona fide, legitimate, honest and necessary amendments and should never permit mala fide and dishonest amendments. The purpose and object of Order VI Rule 17 of the Code is to allow either party to alter or amend his pleadings in such manner and on such terms as may be just. Amendment cannot be claimed as a matter of right and under all circumstances, but the Courts while deciding such prayers should not adopt a hyper-technical approach. Liberal approach should be the general rule particularly, in cases where the other side can be compensated with costs. Normally, amendments are allowed in the pleadings to avoid multiplicity of litigations.

“Justice Delayed is Justice Denied.” written by William Ewart Gladstone

Justice delayed is justice denied” is a legal maxim meaning that if legal redress is available for a party that has suffered some injury, but is not forthcoming in a timely fashion, it is effectively the same as having no redress at all.
people who are victims of any offense usually approach to the police /or judiciary for getting the best Justice , when the victims didn’t get the early justice then the compensation or the punishment to the accused is not rendered then the justice is denied, what is the meaning of the drama of justice? a case delayed for a decade , either from the end of the accused or from the part of the victims the justice should be fast and swift, in event of the delay of the justice the life of the victims the accused is miserable and the justice is presumed to be denied.
a assault on the body and mind is unforgettable hence the compensation for the same thing is not possible through moneys , hence the speedy disposal and execution of the same is required

If justice is not timely provided then the aggrieved party may suffer and also looses its faith in the judiciary system alongwith gross violation of his/her human rights.

A right delayed is a right denied.” is the proverb of Martin Luther and moreover a common proved proverbs is that the
“Justice delayed is justice denied.” This line was written by William Ewart Gladstone (1809 – 1898). He was one of the greatest of English Politicians and also former British Prime Minister.

For the delayed justice not only the Administration but also the judiciary is responsible, and each and every organization has to accept the accountability , and the same should not be waived.

Anticipatory bail in section 438 of the Crpc applies even when there is no “First Information Report”

It has been held that the filing of an F.I.R and registration of a crime by the police is not a condition precedent to the exercise of the power under s. 438 of cr.p.c. Jurisdiction of the high court can be invoked by any person even in the absence of registration of a crime and there is no requirement of furnishing the crime number as such. there is also no requirement that a copy of the F.I.R should be made available for the purpose of considering the application under s. 438 of Cr.p.c.

the provision for the anticipatory bail in section 438 of the code applies even when there is no “First Information Report” and no case for commission of a non-bailable offence has been registered against a person. if a person has reason to believe that he may be arrested on an accusation of having committed a non-bailable offence, although no “First Information Report”” was filed against him, he may appear before the court and apply for an order for his release on bail in the event of his arrest. the filing of a “first information report” is not a condition precedent to the application for anticipatory bail and in such a case, the person having reason to believe that he may be arrested on an accusation of non-bailable offence may appear before the high court or the court of session, not for the purpose of being taken into custody of the court but for getting an order for his release in case he is arrested. no doubt, even after a “First Information Report” is lodged against such a person, he will be at liberty to appear before the high court or court of session and apply for anticipatory bail without surrendering himself to the jurisdiction and orders of the court in the matter of his custody as an accused; but although such a course is left open to the person, he may as well appear before the magistrate having jurisdiction and submit himself to the orders of the court regarding grant of bail to him or taking him into custody.

No motor vehicle could be altered to change the original specification Supreme court

The Supreme Court, in a recent judgment said no motor vehicle could be altered to change the original specification made by the manufacturer that has been used for the purpose its registration. The apex court referred to an amended provision of the Motor Vehicles Act and observed that its “clear intent” was that a vehicle cannot be so altered that the particulars contained in the certificate of registration are at variance with those ‘originally specified by the manufacturer’.

There is a long standing debate among the vehicle owners in authorities in India over the extent of the modification. Once the vehicle is on road and registered with RTO, most of the owners try to modify their vehicles starting from a basic tyre change to a complete makeover of a car/ motorcycle. And with this judgment, people are left wondering what can be changed and what can’t be,
The judgment by a bench of Justices Arun Mishra and Vineet Saran said in its verdict – “No vehicle can be altered so as to change original specification made by the manufacturer. Such particulars cannot be altered, which have been specified by the manufacturer for the purpose of entry in the certificate of registration.” According to the provision of the Act, ‘alteration’ means a change in the structure of a vehicle.

The apex court actually sets aside a judgment of a division bench of the Kerala High Court, which earlier said that the structural alteration was permissible as per the provisions of the Kerala Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989. Kerala is known for many modified vehicles on the road. Here’s what the Supreme Court’s judgment that overturns the Kerala High Court judgment says-

“In our considered opinion the Division Bench in the impugned judgment of the High Court of Kerala has failed to give effect to the provisions contained in section 52(1) and has emphasized only on the Rules. As such, the decision rendered by the Division Bench cannot be said to be laying down the law correctly

What is the purpose of the anti-defection law? What are the grounds of disqualification of a M L A ?

What is the purpose of the anti-defection law? What are the grounds of disqualification?

The main purpose of the antidefection law is to control the political defection by the legislators in state assembly or in the parliament. There are two grounds on which a member of a legislature can be disqualified.

first ground is that if the member of a legislature voluntarily gives up the membership of the party, he shall be disqualified.
Voluntarily giving up the membership is not the same as resigning from a party.
Even without resigning, a legislator can be disqualified if by his conduct the Speaker/Chairman
of the concerned House draws a reasonable inference that the member has voluntarily given up the membership of his party.

Second, if a member of a legislature votes in the House against the direction or interest of his party and his action is not condoned by his party, he can be disqualified. the above mentioned are the two grounds on which a legislator can be disqualified from being a member of the House.

However, there is an exception that was provided in the law to protect the legislators from disqualification. The 10th Schedule says that if there is a merger between two political parties and two-thirds of the members of a legislature party agree to the merger, they will not be disqualified.