Fraud vitiates judicial process, so a false complaint and resulting warrants were quashed as an abuse of court process.

A complaint procured by fraud cannot sustain judicial process, and the principle that fraud vitiates every solemn act was applied to the proceedings founded on it. Because the complaint was found ex facie false and based on a non-genuine factual foundation, the resulting process and warrants were treated as vitiated, an abuse of the process of court, and ab initio void. The complaint and all consequential proceedings, including the warrants issued in the case, were liable to be quashed and were quashed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the complaint and all proceedings arising from it, including the warrants issued thereon, were liable to be quashed on the ground that they were the product of fraud and an abuse of the process of court.

Analysis: The complaint was found to be ex facie false and fraudulent, having been initiated on an asserted factual foundation that was not genuine. A proceeding procured by fraud cannot be permitted to stand, and the principle that fraud vitiates every solemn act was applied equally to judicial proceedings. The issuance of process on such a complaint was treated as equally vitiated, and the proceedings were regarded as an abuse of the process of court and ab initio void.

Conclusion: The complaint and the consequential proceedings, including the warrants issued in the case, were liable to be quashed and were quashed.

---