Jharkhand High Court Refers Contempt Case Against Advocate General To Larger Bench Amid Claims Of False Affidavits, Procedural Complexities

The Jharkhand High Court has referred a pending contempt case involving the state's Advocate General, accused of filing false affidavits, to a larger bench for further deliberation. The Court emphasised the importance of judicial propriety and the binding nature of decisions from a coordinate bench, stating that differing views should be referred to a larger bench.Justice Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, presiding over the matter, observed “When a decision of a Coordinate Bench of the same High Court is brought to be notice of the Bench, it is to be respected and is binding subject to right of the Bench of such co-equal strength to take a different view and refer the question to the larger Bench, it is the only course of action open to a Bench of a co-equal strength and faced with previous decision taken by a Bench with same action.”“This Court does not want to proceed in the present matter distinguishing the judgment of the Hon'ble Division Bench in view of principle of judicial propriety demand as this Court is of the view that the Hon'ble Division Bench judgment is per inquirium which is not binding effect, however, due to judicial propriety, it will not be proper for this Court to proceed ignoring the judgment of the Hon'ble Division Bench in Contempt Case (Crl.) No.3 of 2021,” Justice Dwivedi added.BackgroundThe case background involves a criminal miscellaneous petition where the State was directed on March 6, 2024, to provide investigation instructions and file a supplementary counter affidavit within two weeks. The court then directed the Director General of Police (DGP), Jharkhand, Ranchi, to intervene and file the supplementary counter affidavit within two weeks. The DGP complied, revealing discrepancies in the supplementary counter affidavit. According to the Superintendent of Police, Hazaribag, a supplementary chargesheet had been submitted on January 19, 2016, against the petitioner and Md. Shane Raja, who was shown as an absconder. The chargesheet stated that the petitioner was on bail, but the counter affidavit claimed the petitioner was absconding. Additionally, the chargesheet lacked witness information supporting the prosecution's case.On April 29, 2024, the court observed, “It appears that the Superintendent of Police, Hazaribagh has misguided the Director General of Police, Jharkhand, Ranchi and the Director General of Police, Jharkhand, Ranchi has filed the present supplementary counter affidavit.”The order further stated, “prima facie, it appears that in a mechanical way, the affidavit has been filed before the court by none other than the Director General of Police, Jharkhand, Ranchi himself. As such, the Director General of Police, Jharkhand, Ranchi is directed to explain the above misappropriation in the supplementary chargesheet as well as the disclosure made in para-7 of the supplementary counter affidavit by way of filing further supplementary counter affidavit.”The DGP, Jharkhand, Ranchi, was also allowed to seek an explanation from the Superintendent of Police, Hazaribag, for misleading him. At the next hearing on May 6, 2024, the court noted that the DGP had urgently requested an explanation from the Superintendent of Police, Hazaribag, who claimed the error was typographical. The court remarked, “Thus, it is crystal clear that false affidavit has been filed before this Court by the Director General of Police, Jharkhand at the instance of Superintendent of Police, Hazaribagh.”Further, the court observed that the affidavit filed on May 6, 2024, was also misleading, with a missing page in the supplementary chargesheet suggesting an attempt to mislead the court with false information by the DGP, Jharkhand. The court highlighted, “This aspect of filing of false affidavit was the subject matter before the several High Courts as well as Hon'ble Supreme Court and it has been repeatedly emphasized that averments in the affidavit should be clear and specific and to the dismay of the Court it is not only vague but, highly unsatisfactory. The two officers of such high stature have not cared to discharge their duty with responsibility.” The court underscored the serious nature of making false statements before the court, adding, “A very lame excuse is taken by Superintendent of Police, Hazaribagh that it was a typographical error and this matter is pending since 2013 before this Court. It is well settled that a person makes a false statement before Court and makes an attempt to deceive the Court, interferes with administration of justice and is guilty of contempt of Court. The Court not only has the inherent powers but it would be failing in its duty if alleged contemner is not dealt with a contempt jurisdiction for abusing process of Court. Prima facie, these two officers are in contempt of Court.”Following the court's directive on May 6, 2024, the DGP, Jharkhand, Ranchi, filed an I.A. seeking to withdraw the supplementary counter affidavits submitted on his behalf and requested permission to submit ...

Jharkhand High Court Refers Contempt Case Against Advocate General To Larger Bench Amid Claims Of False Affidavits, Procedural Complexities

Bhavya Singh

Tags