Supreme Court Urges Advocates Not To File Baseless Petitions, Flags Outrageous Averments in Family Law Cases
The Supreme Court has deprecated the filing of the vexatious and frivolous applications which cause a delay in the disposals, adding to the pendency of the cases.
The bench comprising Justices BR Gavai and KV Viswanathan said that “it is time that such frivolous and vexatious proceedings are met with due sanctions in the form of exemplary costs to dissuade parties from resorting to such tactics.”
The Court emphasized the role of the lawyers to desist from filing any proceeding or application that prima facie lacks merit.
“The legal profession has an important role to play in the process. Any proceeding or application which prima facie lacks merit should not be instituted in a court. We are constrained to observe this because of late we notice that pleadings/petitions with outrageous and ex facie unbelievable averments are made with no inhibition whatsoever. This is especially so in some family law proceedings, both civil and criminal. Reading some of the averments therein, we are left to wonder whether at all the deponents were conscious of what has been written purportedly on their behalf, before appending their signatures. These misadventures directly impinge on the rule of law, because they add to the pendency and the consequential delay in the disposal of other cases which are crying for justice.”, the court observed.
In this case, the litigant had filed an application seeking a further investigation after a gross delay of about 7 years from the filing of the charge sheet citing irregularities in the police investigation. The litigant had not averred anything about the irregularities performed in the investigation in her evidence during the trial, and neither produced credible materials warranting the court's order for further investigation.
The application for further investigation was filed after her recall application under Section 311 of Cr. P.C was dismissed by the trial court and High Court.
The judgment authored by Justice Viswanathan allowed the accused to appeal against the High Court's decision to allow the respondent no.1/applicant's application for further investigation.
The Court observed that no further investigation be allowed under Section 173(8) CrPC when the party has not whispered about anything new in its evidence and has based its application for further investigation without averring fresh materials.
Also From Judgment- S. 173(8) CrPC | No Further Investigation Be Ordered If Application Was Filed Without Any Fresh Material : Supreme Court
Case Title: K. Vadivel Versus K. Shanthi & Ors.
Citation : 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 757