Courts must throw out unscrupulous claims, duty is to keep judicial balance: SC | india-news | Hindustan Times
Today in New Delhi, India
Mar 30, 2017-Thursday
-°C
New Delhi
  • Humidity
    -
  • Wind
    -

Courts must throw out unscrupulous claims, duty is to keep judicial balance: SC

india Updated: Jan 08, 2017 13:28 IST
PTI
Supreme court

The Supreme Court held that it was the duty of lower courts to exercise judicial restraint to aid the adjudication process.(HT File Photo)

The duty of a judge is to sustain judicial balance and not to cause trauma to adjudication process, the Supreme Court has ruled while setting aside an order of the Hyderabad high court directing the police not to arrest three accused in a riots case.

A bench headed by justice Dipak Misra also said courts should oust “unscrupulous litigants” from invoking the inherent jurisdiction of the court at the drop of a hat to file an application for quashing of an FIR or investigation.

The court allowed an appeal filed by the Telangana government in which it had said that whether the high court, while refusing to exercise its inherent powers under Section 482 of CrPC, can restrain the probe agency from arresting the accused persons during the course of investigation.

The bench also comprising justice Amitava Roy said that while entertaining petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution or Section 482 of CrPC, a high court should exercise “judicial restraint”.

“It is the duty of a judge to sustain the judicial balance and not to think of an order which can cause trauma to the process of adjudication. It should be borne in mind that the culture of adjudication is stabilised when intellectual discipline is maintained and further when such discipline constantly keeps guard on the mind,” the bench said.

“The courts should oust and obstruct unscrupulous litigants from invoking the inherent jurisdiction of the court at the drop of a hat to file an application for quashing of launching an FIR or investigation and then seek relief by an interim order. It is the obligation of the court to keep such unprincipled and unethical litigants at bay,” the court said.

“What needs to be stated here is that the states where Section 438 CrPC has not been deleted and kept on the statute book, the high court should be well advised that while entertaining petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution or Section 482 CrPC, exercise judicial restraint,” it said.