SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(SC) 830

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
(From the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench)
M.R. SHAH, SANJIV KHANNA, JJ.
Safiq Ahmad – Appellant
Versus
ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd. & Others - Respondents
Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 1110 of 2017
Decided on : 16-12-2021

Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner(s):Atul Nanda, Siddharth, Amit Kumar Agarwal, Anjani Kumar Mishra, Hardeep Kaur Mishra, Praveen Kumar Mishra, Rajesh Sen, Dr. Pratyush Nandan, Advocates
For the Respondent(s):K.M. Nataraj, ASG Raghavendra S. Srivatsa, Arjun Garg, Aakash Nandolia, Sagun Srivastava, Navneet Kumar, Ajit Pravin Wagh, Mohit Singh, Parijat Kishore, Suvendu Suvasis Dash, Md. Apzal Ansari, V. N. Raghupathy, Sanjai Kumar Pathak, Shashi Pathak, Mohini Chaubey, Annam D. N. Rao Annam Venkatesh, Rahul Mishra, Ananya Khandelwal, Agrimaa Singh, Shiv Shankar, T. R. B. Sivakumar, Nikhil Goel, Abhinav Mukerji, Bihu Sharma, Akshay C. Shrivastav, Pratishtha Vij, Sudhir Naagar, Ruchi Kohli, B. Krishna Prasad, Rachana Srivastava, Radhika Gautam, Praveen Agrawal, T. G. Narayanan Nair, Priya Balakrishnan, Devendra Singh, Vishwajit S. Kamble, Hitesh Kumar Sharma, S.K. Rajora, Akhileswar Jha, Sunil Mare, Naresh K. Sharma, Ardhendumauli Kumar Prasad, Anil K. Jha, Sibo Sankar Mishra, Chanchal Kumar Ganguli, Avneesh Arputham, Anuradha Arputham, For M/s. Arputham Aruna And Co, K.S. Mahadevan, Swati Bansal, Rajesh Kumar, Ambhoj Kumar Sinha, Bharat Barowaria, Vishnu Mehra, Manjeet Chawla, Anant Mehrotra, Atul Nanda, Siddharth, Amit Kumar Agarwal, Sandeep Sudhakar Deshmukh, Mukesh K. Giri, Sahil Tagotra, Swarupama Chaturvedi, Arvind Verma, Sakshi Kakkar, Samridhi Sharma, Shakti Singh, Raghavendra S. Srivatsa, Samar Vijay Singh, Vipin Singh Bansal, Ranjeeta Rohatgi, Shakil Ahmad Syed, Pradeep Misra, Abhimanyu Tewari, Eliza Bar, Siddhesh Kotwal, Ana Upadhyay, Manya Hasija, Pragya Barsaiyan, Akash Singh, Nirnimesh Dube, Uttara Babbar, Manan Bansal, Jayant Sud, ASG Aman Sinha, K.L. Janjani, Anmol Chandan, Deepabali Dutta, Deep Shikha Bharti, Rajesh Singh Chauhan, Gurmeet Singh Makker, Aravindh S., C. Rubavathi, Deepak Thukral, Dy. AG Gautam Sharma, Dr. Monika Gusain, Narendra Kumar, Raghavendra Kr., Anand Kr. Dubey, C. K. Sasi, Abdulla Naseeh V.T., Meena K.P., M/s. Parekh & Co., D. Kumanan, Sheikh Fakhruddin Kalia, Astha Sharma, Anant Vijay Palli, Nikhil Palli, Deepak Goel, Jayant Sud, ASG K.J. Janjani, Aman Sinha, Anmol Chandan, Deepabali Dutta, Deep Shikha Bhartai, Rajesh Singh Chauhan, Amrish Kumar, Suhaan Mukerji, Vishal Prasad, Nikhil Parikshith, Sayandeep Pahari, for M/s. PLR Chambers And Co., Kunal Chatterji, Maitrayee Banerjee, Rohit Bansal, Jayant Mohan, Sunny Choudhary, Sandeep Sharma, K. Enatoli Sema, Amit Kumar Singh, Chubalemla Chang, Avijit Mani Tripathi, T.K. Nayak, K.V. Kharlynydoh, Shirish Mehrotra, Prashanti Singh, Atul, Sanpreet Ajmani, Bably Singh, Manju Jetley, G. Indira, Habilila Nana, Advocates

IMPORTANT POINT
Fake claim petitions must be eliminated by all possible means.

Headnote:

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 – Sections 158 and 159 – Employee’s Compensation Act, 1923 – Section 10 – Fake claim petitions – Malady and remedy – Some of modus operandi adopted are; i) Non-road accident injury-death converted into road accident claims; ii) fraudulent implantation of vehicle; iii) false implantation of driver; iv) claimant implantation; v) multiple claims at various for a at different territorial locations for compensation out of injury/death caused arising out of same accident – Often claim applications are filed both before various MACT Tribunals as well as authorities under Employees Compensation Act, 1923; vi) fake/fabricated insurance policies; and vii) fake/fabricated income documents/medical documents for exaggerated compensation – For the purpose of earning illegal money, some actual vehicle owners and actual drivers of vehicles in connivance with advocates, submits registration certificates of their vehicles and Driver Licences in the unknown motor accident cases for filing fake petitions – Elaborate directions issued. (Paras 7.1 to 7.4)

Facts of the case:

Point in issue is with respect to filing of fake claim petitions for getting compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act as well as under the Workmen’s Compensation Act.

Findings of Court:

Additional Solicitor General of India to appear on behalf of the Ministry of Transport, Government of India and to assist the Court and to come out with suggestions how to curb the menace of filing false/fake claim petitions. After getting the response/suggestions, we may issue further directions to be applied pan India.

Result : Directions issued.

ORDER :

1. The issue is with respect to filing of fake claim petitions for getting compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act as well as under the Workmen Compensation Act.

2. Pursuant to our earlier order dated 05.10.2021, the Special Investigating Team (SIT) has filed a Status Report with respect to complaints filed/enquiry completed, the names of the accused, where the criminal complaints are filed and in which criminal cases the charge sheets have been filed. A separate sheet containing the names of advocates against whom the prima facie cases of cognizable offences have been found, is also filed in a separate sealed cover. It is stated in the Status Report that total 1376 cases of suspicious claims from various Districts in the State of U.P. have been received so far by the SIT. That the year-wise detail of 1376 cases received in various years thereof is as under:

Sr.No.

Year

Cases received each year

1.

2015

252

2.

2016

735

3.

2017

128

4.

2018

95

5.

2019

65

6.

2020

71

7.

2021

30

Total Cases

1376

3. It is reported that out of total 1376 cases of suspicious claims received by the SIT, after completing enquiry of 247 cases of suspicious claims till date, total 198 accused persons have been prima facie found guilty of cognizable offence and accordingly total 92 criminal cases have been registered in various districts. It is stated in the Status Report that against some of the accused persons, more than 1 criminal cases have been registered. It is stated that enquiry of remaining cases of suspicious claims is underway.

3.1 It is further stated that out of total criminal cases registered so far, investigation of 36 criminal cases have been completed and charge sheets against accused persons have been filed in 32 criminal cases and final reports in 4 criminal cases have been forwarded to the concerned Criminal Court.

3.2 It is further stated that total 92 criminal cases in various Districts have been registered till date, of which, 28 advocates have been named as accused persons in 55 cases. Charge sheets against 11 advocates in 25 cases have been forwarded to the concerned trial Court till date.

3.3 It is further stated in the Status Report that Headquarter of the SIT is situated in Lucknow. Officers/employees have to go in the districts of the entire State and sometimes have to go in other States outside the State of Uttar Pradesh for conducting enquiry/investigation proceedings as and when so warranted. It is stated that due to the outbreak of Covid-19, there was a lockdown and termination of transportation services in the State and even some of the officers/employees have been got infected, enquiry/investigation process was adversely affected. It is stated that on getting the situation normal after completion of lockdown of Corona period, full attempts are being made to start this enquiry/investigation process speedily.

3.4 Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the SIT has also submitted that as the respective insurance companies are not ready to being complainants in the FIR, the investigating officer of the SIT has to become the complainant and therefore also it takes some time. It is reported that the investigating officer is also present in the Court.

4. We impress upon the investigating officer of the SIT to expedite the enquiry/investigation with respect to complaints already received from various insurance companies with respect to suspicious fake claims. We also call upon the SIT to file a further affidavit pointing out in how many cases the charge sheets have been filed; when the charge sheets have been filed (the date of filing of the charge sheets), in which Courts the charge sheets have been filed and in how many cases the charges have been framed by the concerned Magisterial Court.

5. A response affidavit has been filed on behalf of the Bar

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top