Any falsehood by lawyers or litigants trying to take “undue advantage” of the court’s sympathy in matters of grant of remission will not be tolerated, the Supreme Court asserted on Tuesday as it dismissed a case where false statements were made by three petitioners to seek remission.
Pointing to the large volume of cases confronting the courts, a bench headed by justice AS Oka said that judges in the apex court often rely on statements made by lawyers in the petition to grant relief, but such instances have shaken its “faith” in the system and made it difficult for the judges to trust members of the bar.
“The system works on faith and when we come across such cases, our faith is shaken,” the bench, also comprising justice Augustine George Masih, remarked.
The court dismissed the petition filed by three life convicts who lied that they had completed 14 years of actual sentence on the date of filing the plea on July 15.
“During the past two weeks, seven cases came to light where blatantly false statements were made in petitions before the court,” the bench said. “Undue advantage is being taken of the sympathy of this court...It can’t be an accident that in seven matters, there is blatant false statements made before this court.”
Senior advocate Rishi Malhotra, who had filed the plea, appeared before the court and apologised, saying he will be careful in future.
{{/usCountry}}Senior advocate Rishi Malhotra, who had filed the plea, appeared before the court and apologised, saying he will be careful in future.
{{/usCountry}}“You are careful now when we have caught you... We find it difficult now to trust the members of the bar. Rather, we should ourselves read through every page of the file,” the bench blasted at the lawyer. “We have been lenient with you. In the 6-7 matters that we have cited, find out in how many matters have you appeared.”
The court was inclined to impose exemplary cost in the matter. “However, we cannot penalise the petitioner for the mistakes committed by their lawyers,” it added.