Punjab & Haryana HC Imposes ₹10 Lakh Cost On Litigant Who Sought Quashing Of Cheating Case After Leaving Country Without Court's Permission

The Punjab & Haryana High Court has taken action against 'misuse of the legal process and filing of 'frivolous litigation' by imposing a cost of Rs. 10 lakh on a man who fled the country in disobedience of the Court's directions and subsequently filed a plea seeking quashing of the cheating case against him.

Dr. William Dean was booked for cheating and granted bail by the Trial Court with the condition that he could not leave the country without the Court's permission. His application seeking permission to visit abroad was also rejected. However, it was submitted that he left the country without permission and never returned.

In the plea for quashing of the FIR, the High Court directed him to remain present in Court on multiple occasions, but he did not appear. After he repeatedly failed to appear, in January, a non-bailable arrest warrant was issued by the police.

While noting that William's whereabout are not known and he had shifted at an undisclosed place, Justice Mahabir Singh Sindhu said, "this Court is of the considered opinion that present petition is nothing; but complete misuse of the process of Court, as a ploy to prolong the proceedings pending before learned trial Court arising out of FIR No... Hence, in order to discourage such type of frivolous litigation, this Court deems it appropriate to dismiss the present petition with exemplary costs of Rs. 10 Lakh as a deterrence for the future."

The Court was hearing a plea for quashing of FIR under Sections 419, 420, 465, 467, 471, 120-B & 201 of the IPC, registered at Punjab's Sadar Batala, along with all consequential proceedings.

It was submitted that an FIR was registered on the basis of written complaint made by one Daniel Sadhu Masih, resident of Amritsar, claiming to be the Trustee of a School. 

It was alleged that petitioner, along with other co-accused, including officials from Revenue Department, forged & fabricated certain documents in order to grab the Trust property.

It was also alleged that petitioner entered into an agreement to sell the land measuring 5.15 Acres belonging to the Trust with two persons and received earnest money to the tune of Rs. 85 Lakh.

It was argued that after investigation, report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. was presented in 2018 and later a supplementary report under Section 173 (8) Cr.P.C. was also submitted in 2021 before the trial Court.

Upon hearing the arguments the Court noted that the petitioner left the country without permission, in violation of trial court's direction and failed to appear before High Court despite its order.

Justice Sindhu observed that, there remains no doubt that petitioner is successfully avoiding the judicial proceedings without any justification and had completely misused the concession of bail.

He further reiterated that the petitioner had deliberately disobeyed the order of the High Court as well as of  trial Court while leaving the country, without obtaining any permission in this regard. 

“As a result thereof, there is no hesitation to observe that petitioner has made the Court proceedings as a mockery and thus, having no respect for the rule of law,” the bench added.

Consequently, while disposing of the plea, the Court imposed a cost of Rs. 10 lakh on the petitioners.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 44

Gursewak Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.

Joginder Pal Ratra, Sr. DAG, Punjab for respondent No. 1.

Veneet Sharma, Advocate for respondent No. 2.

Gursewak Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.