Back
2023 Supreme(SC) 1152
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
ABHAY S. OKA, PANKAJ MITHAL, JJ.
Ambalal Parihar - Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan & Ors. - Respondents
Criminal Appeal No.3233 Of 2023 (Arising out of S.L.P.(Crl.) No. 8027 of 2023)
Decided On : 16-10-2023
For the Petitioner(s): Mr. Pranab Prakash, AOR Mr. Yash Chaturvedi, Adv.
For the Respondent(s): Mr. Ashutosh Shekhar Paarcha, Adv. Ms. Neha Kapoor, Adv. Mr. Milind Kumar, AOR Mr. Sanyat Lodha, AOR Ms. Sanjana Saddy, Adv. Ms. Surbhi Arora, Adv.
The main legal point established in this judgment is that filing a Civil Writ Petition to consolidate First Information Reports (FIRs) can constitute a gross abuse of process of law and forum hunting. The Court emphasized the importance of following the assigned roster and not taking up cases that were not specifically assigned by the Chief Justice.
Headnote:
Abuse of Process of Law - Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) - Section 482
Fact of the Case:
This case involves the abuse of process of law by the second to fourth respondents. The appellant filed six First Information Reports (FIRs) against the respondents, and two other FIRs were filed by other informants. The respondents filed two Criminal Miscellaneous Petitions to quash the FIRs filed by the other informants. Subsequently, the respondents filed a Civil Writ Petition seeking to consolidate all eight FIRs. The High Court granted interim relief, directing that no coercive action be taken against the respondents in connection with the FIRs. The appellant alleged that the respondents engaged in forum hunting and abused the process of law. The Court found that the respondents' actions constituted a gross abuse of process of law and dismissed the Civil Writ Petition. The Court directed the respondents to pay costs to the Rajasthan State Legal Services Authority and ordered that their conduct be brought to the attention of the Court hearing the petitions to quash the FIRs. The Court also directed the Registrar of the High Court to place a copy of the order in all eight petitions to quash the FIRs.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found that the respondents' filing of the Civil Writ Petition to consolidate the FIRs was a gross abuse of process of law and amounted to forum hunting. The Court emphasized the importance of following the assigned roster and not taking up cases that were not specifically assigned by the Chief Justice. The Court held that allowing such practices would undermine the meaning of the roster and constitute an act of gross impropriety. The Court also noted that the same advocate represented the respondents in both civil and criminal cases, highlighting the improper coordination between the two cases. The Court concluded that the respondents' conduct would be considered by the Court hearing the petitions to quash the FIRs.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court held that the respondents' filing of a Civil Writ Petition to consolidate the FIRs was a gross abuse of process of law and amounted to forum hunting. The Court emphasized the importance of following the assigned roster and not taking up cases that were not specifically assigned by the Chief Justice. The Court also highlighted the improper coordination between the civil and criminal cases, where the same advocate represented the respondents. The Court directed the respondents to pay costs and ordered that their conduct be brought to the attention of the Court hearing the petitions to quash the FIRs.
Result: The Court dismissed the Civil Writ Petition filed by the respondents, holding that their actions constituted a gross abuse of process of law and forum hunting. The Court directed the respondents to pay costs to the Rajasthan State Legal Services Authority and ordered that their conduct be brought to the attention of the Court hearing the petitions to quash the FIRs. The Court also directed the Registrar of the High Court to place a copy of the order in all eight petitions to quash the FIRs.
JUDGMENT :
(Abhay S. Oka, J.)
Leave granted.
2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties.
3. This is a shocking case of gross abuse of process of law by the second to fourth respondents. At the instance of the appellant, six First Information Reports were registered against the second to fourth respondents. There were two other First Information Reports registered against the same respondents by some other first informants. Two Criminal Miscellaneous Petitions were filed by the second to fourth respondents for quashing the First Information Reports filed at the instance of the other first informants.
4. Our attention is invited to the orders passed on the two petitions under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short "CrPC") filed by the second to fourth respondents. The petitions came up before a learned Single Judge of the Rajasthan High Court in April, 2023 in which no interim relief was granted.
5. Thereafter, the second to fourth respondents took a very extra ordinary step. On 5th May, 2023 a Writ Petition was filed on the civil side by the second and fourth respondents in which a prayer was made for issuing a writ of mandamus for clubbing the eight First Information Reports and consolidating them into one. The impugned order has been passed in the said Civil Writ Petition on 8th May, 2023. The learned Single Judge of the High Court directed that no coercive action shall be taken against the second to fourth respondents in connection with all eight First Information Reports.
6. The appellant has made a very serious allegation by relying upon the then prevailing roster notified by the Chief Justice of the Rajasthan High Court. The allegation is that as the learned Single Judge taking up assignment of the criminal matters dealing with Section 482 CrPC did not grant interim relief to the second to fourth respondents in two cases, this method of filing a Civil Writ Petition was invented in which a prayer was made for consolidation of eight First Information Reports. The allegation is that this was done to avoid the roster Judge who had not granted interim relief. Not only that this course was adopted, the second to fourth respondents in the Civil Writ Petition prayed for interim relief directing that no coercive action shall be taken against the second to fourth respondents in relation to all eight First Information Reports. The complainants were not impleaded in the Civil Writ Petitions. Interestingly, both in civil and criminal cases, the same advocate represented the second to fourth respondents.
7. This is a classic case of forum hunting by the second to fourth respondents. It transpires that notwithstanding the aforesaid relief granted on 8th May, 2023 in the Civil Writ Petition, in the petitions under Section 482 of CrPC for quashing, on 1st June, 2023 the second to fourth respondents persuaded the concerned Bench to grant relief of not taking coercive action against them.
8. Thus, this is a case of gross abuse of process of law. We wonder how a Civil Writ Petition for clubbing First Information Reports could be entertained. In the roster notified by the Chief Justice, there is a separate roster for Criminal Writ Petitions. If the Courts allow such sharp practices, the roster notified by the Chief Justice will have no meaning. The Judges have to follow discipline and ought not to take up any case unless it is specifically assigned by the Chief Justice. A Judge can take up a case provided either the cases of that category have been assigned to him as per the notified roster or the particular case is specifically assigned by the Chief Justice. Taking up a case not specifically assigned by the Chief Justice is an act of gross impropriety. Though a Civil Writ Petition was filed, the learned Judge ought to have converted into a Criminal Writ Petition which could have been placed only before the roster Judge taking up Criminal Writ Petitions.
9. We are sure that this conduct of the second to fourth respo
