Filing a false affidavit to suppress the pendency of a bail application before a higher court to obtain bail from a trial court constitutes a fraud on the court, warranting proceedings for perjury and contempt.

Order Sheet

Heard Mr. Pragalbha Sharma, learned counsel, appearing for the applicant as well as Ms. Palak Dwivedi, learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the Non-applicant/State is present.

Vide order dated 03.03.2026, this Court had granted four weeks’ time to the learned State counsel to obtain and place on record the criminal antecedents of the applicant from the State of Maharashtra. Thereafter, on 08.04.2026, learned counsel appearing for the applicant submitted that the present bail application had become infructuous, as the applicant had already been enlarged on bail by the learned Special Judge ( NDPS Act ), Raipur (C.G.), subsequent to the filing of the charge-sheet. On the said date, this Court observed that when, by order dated 03.03.2026, specific time had been granted for calling the criminal antecedents of the applicant from the State of Maharashtra, it was necessary to ascertain how the applicant came to be granted bail by the trial Court during the pendency of the present bail application before this Court. Consequently, comments were called for from the learned Special Judge ( NDPS Act ), Raipur.

Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, the comments submitted by the learned Special Judge ( NDPS Act ), Raipur have been duly perused.

From perusal of the said comments, it transpires that while the present bail application was pending consideration before this Court, the deponent, namely Naresh Rajendraprasad Pandey, preferred another bail application on behalf of the applicant before the concerned trial Court and filed an afÏdavit in support thereof declaring that no other bail application of the applicant was pending consideration before the Hon’ble High Court.

The aforesaid conduct prima facie discloses deliberate suppression of material facts from the trial Court, submission of a false afÏdavit, and an apparent attempt to mislead the judicial process.

In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Court is prima facie of the considered opinion that serious issues arise regarding suppression of material facts, filing of misleading and false afÏdavits, and interference with the due administration of justice.

Accordingly, let a notice be issued to the aforesaid deponent, namely, Naresh Rajendraprasad Pandey, which shall be served to him through the concerned Superintendent of Police calling upon him to show cause as to why appropriate proceedings for forgery, perjury, and contempt of Court be not initiated against him, inasmuch as he filed the present bail application before this Court along with an afÏdavit in support thereof, and during its pendency, also filed another bail application before the concerned trial Court supported by an afÏdavit falsely stating that no other bail application was pending before this Court.

The Registrar (Judicial) of this Court as well as the learned State Counsel are directed to communicate this order to the concerned Superintendent of Police, for necessary information and compliance.

Let the matter be listed again on 13.05.2026.