2024 Supreme(SC) 806

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
BELA M. TRIVEDI, SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, JJ.
Bhagwan Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. & Ors. – Respondents
Criminal Appeal Nos. 3883-3884 of 2024 (@ SLP(Crl.) Nos. 13052-13053 of 2024 @ Diary No. 18885 of 2024)
Decided On : 20-09-2024

IMPORTANT POINTS
(1) Witnesses play a vital role in facilitating court to arrive at a correct findings, particularly in criminal trials – Witnesses are eyes and ears of justice – They are backbone in decision making process in adversarial system prevalent in India.
(2) There is a great sanctity attached to proceedings conducted in court – Every Advocate putting his signatures on Vakalatnama and on documents to be filed in Courts and every Advocate appearing for a party in courts, particularly in Supreme Court, is presumed to have filed proceedings and put his/her appearance with all sense of responsibility and seriousness – No Professional much less Legal Professional, is immune from being prosecuted for his/her criminal misdeeds.
(3) If there is any change in name of arguing Advocate, it shall be duty of concerned Advocate-on-Record to inform concerned Court Master in advance or at the time of hearing of case.

Headnote:

(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 363, 366, 376 [Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 – Sections 137(2), 87 and 64] – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 482 [Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 – Section 528] – Kidnapping and rape – Quashing of criminal proceedings by High Court – Rejection of Criminal Miscellaneous Recall Application by High Court – Witnesses play a vital role in facilitating court to arrive at a correct findings, particularly in criminal trials – Witnesses are eyes and ears of justice – They are backbone in decision making process in adversarial system prevalent in India – However, condition of witnesses in Indian Legal System is very pathetic – Witnesses are threatened, coerced by using force and lured by monetary considerations, at instances of those who are in power, their henchmen and hirelings, with a view to smother and stifle truth, and to make mockery of justice – Though “Witness Protection Scheme, 2018” has been framed by Central Government and approved by Supreme Court in Mahendra Chawla vs. Union of India, (2019) 14 SCC 615 there is hardly any effective implementation of same – In extraordinary facts and circumstances, and considering gravity and seriousness of case, when High Court and Supreme Court were sought to be taken for a ride and when entire justice delivery system was sought to be put to stake, by respondents and their concerned associates and Advocates, who helped them in forging and fabricating documents to be filed in High Court and Supreme Court, and to pursue false proceedings filed in name of appellant without his knowledge, consent or authority, it is appropriate to hand over investigation of case to CBI – CBI shall register regular case against all persons found involved and responsible, and shall investigate all links leading to commission of alleged crimes and fraud on court – Director, CBI directed to do needful in this regard and to submit report to Supreme Court within two months. (Paras 27, 28 and 32)

(B) Administration of Justice – Fraud upon Courts – To create or to assist creating false documents and to use them as genuine knowing them to be false in Court proceedings, to falsely implicate somebody in false proceedings filed in name of person who had no knowledge whatsoever about same are the acts attributable to offences punishable under Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 – They are also acts of frauds committed not only on person sought to be falsely implicated and on person in whose name such false proceedings are filed without his knowledge and consent, but is a fraud committed on Courts – No Court can allow itself to be used as an instrument of fraud and no Court can allow its eyes to be closed to fact that it is being used as an instrument of fraud – Matter assumes serious concern when Advocates who are officers of Court are involved and when they actively participate in ill-motivated litigations of unscrupulous litigants, and assist them in misusing and abusing process of law to achieve their ulterior purposes – Legal Profession is perceived to be essentially a service oriented, noble profession and Lawyers are perceived to be very responsible officers of court and an important adjunct of administration of justice – In the process of overall depletion and erosion of ethical values and degradation of professional ethics, instances of professional misconduct are also on rise – There is a great sanctity attached to proceedings conducted in court – Every Advocate putting his signatures on Vakalatnama and on documents to be filed in Courts and every Advocate appearing for a party in courts, particularly in Supreme Court, is presumed to have filed proceedings and put his/her appearance with all sense of responsibility and seriousness – No Professional much less Legal Professional, is immune from being prosecuted for his/her criminal misdeeds. (Paras 29, 30 and 31)

(C) Supreme Court Rules, 2013 – Rule 7 Order IV – Notaries Act 1952 – Section 9 – Notaries Rules 1956 – Rule 11 – Fraud upon Courts – Corrective measures – An Advocate shall, at all times, comport himself in a manner befitting his status as an officer of Court, a privileged member of community and a gentleman, bearing in mind that what may be lawful and moral for a person who is not a member of Bar, or for a member of Bar in his non-professional capacity, may still be improper for an Advocate – Though an Advocate is expected to fearlessly uphold interests of his client, his conduct must conform to Rules of Conduct and Etiquettes laid down in Chapter, both in letter and in spirit – Any acts or omissions thereof, on part of Notary would tantamount to misconduct, and person complained against would be unfit to be a Notary – Registry directed to send a copy of Order to Bar Council of India and to Government of India for necessary perusal and action as may be deemed necessary. (Paras 33, 37 and 38)

(D) Practice and Procedure – Advocate on Record may mark appearances of those Advocates who are actually appearing in case i.e. Advocate-on Record and Advocates who are going to appear and argue case on a particular day of hearing – Advocate on Record is expected to know before 11:30 a.m. on date of hearing as to which Advocate/Advocates is/are going to appear/argue particular case, and is accordingly required to mark their appearances as instructed in Notice – Notice nowhere permits Advocates-on-Record to mark appearances of Advocates who are not authorized either to appear and argue the case – If there is any change in name of arguing Advocate, it shall be duty of concerned Advocate-on-Record to inform concerned Court Master in advance or at the time of hearing of case – Concerned Officers/Court Masters shall act accordingly. (Paras 40 and 42)

Facts of the case:

Instant two appeals were sought to be filed in name of appellant. One Appeal is filed challenging Judgment and Order dated 16.12.2019 passed by High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Application under Section 482 No. 41533 of 2019, filed by respondent no. 2 – whereby High Court had allowed said Application and quashed entire proceedings in respect of Supplementary Charge-sheet No. 163A dated 05.12.2018 in Case No. 410 of 2014, arising out of Case Crime No. 443 of 2013, under Sections 363, 366, 376 IPC at Police Station Sehaswan, District Budaun, pending in Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-II, Budaun. Other Appeal is filed challenging order dated 02.04.2024 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous Recall Application No.3/2020, whereby High Court had rejected said application.

Findings of Court:

Notice only permits Advocate-On-Record to mark appearances of Advocates appearing in Court, through link provided on Website or on office mobile app of Supreme Court.

Result : Appeals disposed of with directions and observations.