TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (9) TMI 1805
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....urts as also of the entire legal fraternity/legal profession. The huge quantum of work load in the Courts, limitations of the human agencies in manning the Justice Delivery System and the fertile minds of the unscrupulous litigants and their legal counsellors are some of the factors responsible for not allowing the Justice Delivery System to work as effectively and efficiently as it is expected to work. 4. The wrongdoers must fear the law that they will be punished, the innocents must rest assured that they will not be, and the victims must be confident that they will get the justice. This is what a citizen of the democratic country like India, governed by Rule of Law would legitimately expect from the Courts. The Courts are called the 'Temple of Justice'. However, often brazen attempts are being made to abuse and misuse the process of law by committing frauds on Courts. This is one of such cases where such an attempt has been made to pollute the stream of justice. With this little Preface let us deal with the facts of the case. PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THIS COURT 5. The instant two appeals were sought to be filed in the name of the appellant- Bhagwan Singh. One Appeal is filed chall....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ter was adjourned to the next date i.e. 31.07.2024. 8. On 31.07.2024, the AOR Mr. Anubhav, remained present before the Court. Since on 30.07.2024, the learned Advocate Mr. R.P.S. Yadav had stated that the 'Vakalatnama' was signed by the appellant-Bhagwan Singh in his presence, and on 31.07.2024 he had changed his version by stating that he had received the 'Vakalatnama' with the signature of the appellant-Bhagwan Singh from one lawyer named Mr. Karan Singh practicing in the Allahabad High Court, the Court had directed the Registry to issue notice to the said Advocate Mr. Karan Singh for remaining present before the Court on 09.08.2024. 9. The Court on 31.07.2024 passed the following order recording the statements of Mr. Anubhav, Mr. R.P.S. Yadav and Mr. Bhagwan Singh. "1. In continuation of the yesterday's order, Mr. Anubhav, learned Advocate-on-Record whose `Vakalatnama' has been filed on behalf of the petitioner - Bhagwan Singh in the Special Leave Petition is present in the Court. He states his full name to be Anubhav Yashwant Yadav. He further states that though on the `Vakalatnama' he had identified and attested the signature of the petitioner, that was not correct, and th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n behalf of Ms. Rinki, daughter of Bhagwan Singh and wife of Sukhpal Singh, for recalling of the Order dated 16.12.2019 (which is impugned herein), and since the Sukhpal Singh wanted to file the Special Leave Petition before the Supreme Court, he (Karan Singh) had asked Sukhpal Singh to get the 'Vakalatnama' with the signature of either Rinki or Bhagwan Singh. Thereafter the said Sukhpal Singh gave him the papers along with the 'Vakalatnama' signed in the name of Bhagwan Singh, which he had handed over to the Advocate Mr. R.P.S. Yadav, practicing in the Supreme Court. It may be noted that the said Bhagwan Singh who was also present in the Court on 09.08.2024 stated that his daughter Rinki had eloped and married with Sukhpal Singh in 2013 and since then he had not met either Sukhpal Singh or his daughter Rinki, and therefore he could not have signed the 'Vakalatnama' or the papers of the SLP. At this juncture Mr. R.P.S. Yadav, learned advocate stated that he had prepared the Memo of SLP and got it attested through the Notary Mr. A.N. Singh and at that time the appellant-Bhagwan Singh was not present; and that he had identified the signature of Bhagwan Singh before the Notary, and th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s not met Sukhpal Singh or his daughter Rinki, and therefore, he could not have signed the `Vakalatnama' or the papers of the SLP. 3. On being asked by the Court, Mr. R.P.S. Yadav states that he had prepared the Memo of SLP and got it attested through the Notary Mr. A.N. Singh. He further states that at the time of getting the SLP notarized, the petitioner - Bhagwan Singh was not present, however as per the practice prevailing in the Supreme Court, he identified the signature of Bhagwan Singh before the Notary and the Notary also notarized the said Memo. He thereafter handed over papers to the AOR Mr. Anubhav for presenting in the Supreme Court. 4. Mr. Anubhav Yashwant Yadav, learned Advocate-on-Record states that since he knew the learned Advocate Mr. R.P.S. Yadav, and Mr. Yadav having prepared the SLP Memo and got the papers ready, he had put his signature as the AOR on the Memo of SLP and also on the `Vakalatnama' stating that he himself had attested and identified the signature of petitioner - Bhagwan Singh. 5. From the above, it appears that Mr. A.N. Singh, Notary Government of India whose registration Number is 16959 and who sits in front of the UCO Bank, Supreme Court ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... dated 30.07.2024 in the present SLP. In view of the said submissions, the Court had directed the Registry to explain as to on what basis and why the names of so many advocates are being shown in the Order sheets/Record of Proceedings though, they would be neither appearing as an AOR nor as arguing/senior Counsel. The Court also directed Mr. Sukhpal Singh and Ms. Rinki to be impleaded as party respondent nos. 3 and 4 to the present proceedings and call for the original record of the Application under Section 482 No. 41533/2019 from the Allahabad High Court. 13. The Order dated 28.08.2024 reads as under: "1. This matter was directed to be posted on 23.08.2024 vide the Court's Order dated 09.08.2024, whereby, the Notary 2 Mr. A.N. Singh, Ms. Rinki-daughter of petitioner-Bhagwan Singh and her husband, Mr. Sukh Pal were directed to remain present on the said date. However, due to paucity of time, the matter could not be heard on 23.08.2024, and was directed to be listed on 28.08.2024. 2. Accordingly, today, when the matter is taken up, the Notary Mr. A.N. Singh and Mr. Sukh Pal, son-in-law of the petitioner- Bhagwan Singh are present before the Court. It is stated by Mr. Sukh Pal ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Katara, in the present proceedings, have drawn the attention of the Court to the Order passed by this Court on 10.06.2024 in SLP(Crl.) No.7893/2024 filed by the petitioner Vikas Yadav, arising out of the final judgment and order dated 21.05.2024 passed by the High Court of Delhi in CRLMA No. 15617/2024. According to them, the said Vikas Yadav was convicted in the famous Nitish Katara Case, where in, the respondent no.2-Ajay Katara was the only witness who had deposed against him and whose testimony was relied upon by the Courts below for convicting Vikas Yadav, and that was the reason, false case was sought to be made out against the respondent no.2-Ajay Katara in the present proceedings. They have also drawn the attention of the Court to the list of Advocates shown in the Order Sheet/ Record of Proceedings of SLP(Crl.) No.7893/2024 dated 10.06.2024 and submitted that out of 10 Advocates, 08 Advocates are also shown as the appearing Advocates in the Order Sheet/ Record of Proceedings dated 09.08.2024 in the present SLP. 9. In view of the above submissions, the Registry is directed to explain as to on what basis and why the names of so many Advocates are being shown in the Order S....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....affidavit. Mr. Anubhav Yadav, learned AOR represented by the learned senior advocate Mr. Siddharth Dave, also tendered unconditional apology. 15. The Order passed on 09.09.2024 reads as under: - "1. Heard the learned senior counsel/ learned counsel appearing for the parties. We have also perused the explanations tendered by the Registry pursuant to this Court's Order dated 28.08.2024. 2. Today, Ms. Rinki, daughter of petitioner-Bhagwan Singh, and the wife of Mr. Sukh Pal, is present in the Court. 3. She states that she used to talk to her father, petitioner- Bhagwan Singh, very often from the below mentioned numbers; a. 9027068541- her own mobile number. b. 6399367927- mobile number of her husband c. 8077687246- mobile number of her brother-in-law, Dhaalu. 4. She further states that, 05-06 months back she and her husband, Mr. Sukh Pal, met with her father, petitioner-Bhagwan Singh, at Budaun, Uttar Pradesh, who handed over her the vakalatnama signed by him, and the said vakalatnama was handed over by Mr. Sukh Pal to Mr. Karan Singh, Advocate, who is practicing in the High Court of Allahabad. 5. Mr. Sukh Pal, who is also present in the Court affirms/ supports the st....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., it is pertinent to mention that the accused persons namely Vikas Yadav and Vishal Yadav, are son and nephew of DP Yadav, Ex-Minister and Member of Parliament, who is a known history sheeter having more than 57 criminal cases registered against him and a copy of the same is annexed herewith as annexure R-2/1 (Pages 28-30). That it is also appropriate to mention here that due to continuous intimidation, cajoling and threats by D P Yadav and his associate, except the answering respondent all other prosecution witnesses had turned hostile, but the answering respondent being a responsible citizen has deposed truthfully and has in this way has significantly contributed in the administration of justice. 7. Pertinently, the Division Bench of the Hon'ble High Court in its order dated 06.02.2015, had categorically observed the traumatisation and the pressure put on the answering respondent to prevent him from deposing against the accused persons, in as much as the Hon'ble Court has categorically inter-alia observed that the answering respondent was subjected to continuous threats and still continues to be under pressure for having appeared as a witness. The Hon'ble Court has ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the Indian Penal Code, 1860, at P.S Sahaswan, Badaun is already annexed as Annexure P-1 in the SLP. 14-15.... 16. That it is pertinent to mention that the name of the answering respondent is nowhere to be seen till this stage i.e. he has not been named anywhere, (i) either in the FIR filed by the father of Victim or (ii) in the Writ Petition filed by the victim herself before the High Court nor (iii) in the statement of the victim when she appeared in person before the Honourable High Court. However, very surprisingly, when pursuant to the High Court order, the statement of the victim was recorded by the police under section 161 CRPC, and also under section 164, CRPC, on 22.08.2013 i.e. after about two months of the alleged incident, then, the victim for the very first time introduces a new story and says that the answering respondent has did wrong thing on her person when she reached Ghaziabad for eight days i.e., on 24.06.2023 till 01.07.2023. 17-21.... 22. That, on 20.12.2013 after a thorough investigation, the investigating officer closed the investigation in crime case no. 443/13 qua the answering respondent herein vide supplementary chargesheet no. 1. At this juncture....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Court dated 31.07.2024 filed an affidavit dated 06.08.2024 stating inter alia the following: - "3. That the correct facts are that on 03.07.2024, a call was received by Prem Singh, Former Pradhan of my Village Mudari from Police Station Sahaswan, Distt Badaun, U.P., who asked Prem Singh to bring me (Bhagwan Singh) to Police Station Sahaswan as some notice has to be served upon me. Accordingly, I accompanied Prem Singh to Police Station Sahaswan, where I was handed over three papers by the police and the true copy of the documents given to me by the police on 03.07.2024 at Police Station Sahaswan, District Badaun, Uttar Pradesh are annexed herewith and marked as Annexure A (Colly). The police also obtained my signature on one form on which "Petitioner Intimation Letter" was written. The police official told me that these documents relate to a case titled as 'Bhagwan Singh versus State of U.P' which had been filed by me in the Supreme Court of India and the same arise out from a First Information Report lodged by me several years back with respect to my daughter's kidnapping. 4. That as I had not filed any Special Leave Petition before Hon'ble Supreme Court of India t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the said FIR No. 443/2013. 03.01.2019 - That the Cognizance was taken by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate in the said FIR. 16.11.2019 - That the Respondent No. 2, i.e. Ajay Katara, filed an application Under Section 482 before the Hon'ble High Court of Judicature at Allahabad. 16.12.2019 - That the said application was allowed by the Hon'ble High Court of Judicature at Allahabad. 01.02.2020 -1st recall application bearing No. 03/2020 was filed by the Sukhpal and the said applicantion's affidavit was attested by the Sukhpal as witness and Rinki gave her signed/thumb impression on the Vakalatnama. 28.11.2021 - That the Father-In-Law Bhagwan Singh was not satisfied of merits of the 1st recall application, thereafter Bhagwan Singh filed 2nd wish to join the recall application as applicant then he gave the signed Vakalatnama dated 28.11.2021, copy of the Vakalatnama is annexed herewith as Annexure 'B', to Sukhpal to file a fresh recall application bearing No. 07/2020 and 8/2021 which was filed by the another advocate at Allahabad. March 2024 - That the Sukhpal handed over a Vakalatnama to Mr. Karan Singh for arguing in recall application bearing No. 3/....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....4, he changed his version and stated that he had received the Vakalatnama already signed by the petitioner-Bhagwan Singh from one lawyer named Karan Singh Yadav who is practicing in the Allahabad High Court. (iii) Mr. Karan Singh Yadav, Advocate practicing at Allahabad High Court was directed to remain present before the Court on 09.08.2024 and he stated that he had received the papers of the case along with the signed Vakalatnama i.e with the signature of the petitioner- Bhagwan Singh from his client Sukhpal, son of Rishipal, who happened to be the son-in-law of Bhagwan Sing. He further stated that he had appeared before the High Court in Recall Application No.3/2020 filed on behalf of Ms. Rinki, daughter of Bhagwan Singh and wife of Sukhpal Singh seeking recall of the order dated 16.12.2019, and after the dismissal of the said application on 02.04.2024, he had asked Sukhpal to get the Vakalatnama with the signature of either Rinki or Bhagwan Singh. Thereafter, said Sukhpal gave him the papers along with the Vakalatnama signed in the name of Bhagwan Singh, which he handed over to the Advocate Mr. R.P.S. Yadav practicing in the Supreme Court. (iv) The Notary Mr. A.N. Singh admi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... (vii) However, the appellant-petitioner Bhagwan Singh all throughout the proceedings maintained his stand and stated in his affidavit that he had never met his daughter Rinki or his son-in-law Sukhpal since 2013, nor he had any contact with his daughter telephonically or by any other means as sated in his affidavit he had not travelled to Allahabad since 2014 for any purpose. He also stated that he had neither filed the present SLP proceedings, nor was aware about the filing, pendency or disposal of the application under Section 482 No. 41533/2019 before the Allahabad High Court. (viii) As transpiring from the affidavit filed by the Respondent No.2 Mr. Ajay Kataria that since he was a star witness in the famous Nitish Katara case, and on the basis of whose evidence the accused Vikas Yadav and Vishal Yadav, who happened to be the son and nephew of Mr. D. P. Yadav, Ex- Minister, and M.P. were convicted, he was falsely implicated in number of cases. This is one of such cases, filed in the name of Bhagwan Singh, at the instance of Respondent No.3 Sukhpal, Respondent No.2 Rinki, with the help of their Advocates appearing for them in the High Court and this Court. PROCEEDINGS BEFORE....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....from the Order dated 02.04.2024, it appears that the main contention raised by Mr. Karan Singh was that the opponent no.2 Bhagwan Singh was not given opportunity of filing counter affidavit before passing the judgment on 16.12.2019 in the Main Application under Section 482. 23. It further appears that Criminal Miscellaneous Recall Application Nos. 7/2020 and 8/2021 were also filed by one Advocate Mr. Alok Kumar Yadav on 20.12.2020 seeking condonation of delay and on 28.11.2020 seeking recall of the order dated 16.12.2019. Along with the said Applications, one affidavit with the signature of said Advocate Alok Kumar Yadav, without the signature of Bhagwan Singh on whose behalf it was sought to be filed and without the signature of the Oath Commissioner, was sought to be filed. The said Alok Yadav also filed his Vakalatnama on 28.11.2021 with the alleged thumb mark of Bhagwan Singh. All the said three Recall applications were argued by the Advocate Karan Singh Yadav purportedly on behalf of Bhagwan Singh, who was opponent No.2 in the main proceedings under Section 482 filed by Ajay Katara. The Recall Application No.3/2020 came to be rejected by the Court vide order dated 02.04.2024 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the accused in the said case namely Vikas Yadav and Vishal Yadav, (who happened to be the son and nephew of D.P. Yadav, Ex- Minister and Member of Parliament) were convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for life by the trial court. In the appeal, the High Court had confirmed the conviction and further ordered that the said two accused shall not be entitled to any remission till they have completed 25 years of actual sentence. The said judgment was also confirmed by the Supreme Court. Mr. Katara is made to suffer for being witness in the said case. As stated by him in the affidavit, he was subjected to continuous threats and still continues to be under pressure for having appeared as the witness. He has stated that before the said case, he had no case civil or criminal filed against him, and after the said case, he has been continuously targeted with a campaign of false and frivolous cases and named in around thirty-seven cases, including the present one at the behest of Yadav family and their associates. However, he has been cleared in 35 out of 37 cases. 27. It would not be out of place to reiterate that the witnesses play a vital role in facilitating the court to arrive at a co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r abuse, or a means in the process of the court to subvert justice, for the reason that the court exercises its jurisdiction, only in furtherance of justice. The interests of justice and public interest coalesce, and therefore, they are very often one and the same. A petition or an affidavit containing a misleading and/or an inaccurate statement, only to achieve an ulterior purpose, amounts to an abuse of process of the court." 30. The matter assumes serious concern when the Advocates who are the officers of the Court are involved and when they actively participate in the ill-motivated litigations of the unscrupulous litigants, and assist them in misusing and abusing the process of law to achieve their ulterior purposes. 31. People repose immense faith in Judiciary, and the Bar being an integral part of the Justice delivery system, has been assigned a very crucial role for preserving the independence of justice and the very democratic set up of the country. The legal profession is perceived to be essentially a service oriented, noble profession and the lawyers are perceived to be very responsible officers of the court and an important adjunct of the administration of justice. In....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....himself in a manner befitting his status as an officer of the Court, a privileged member of the community, and a gentleman, bearing in mind that what may be lawful and moral for a person who is not a member of the Bar, or for a member of the Bar in his non-professional capacity, may still be improper for an advocate. Though an Advocate is expected to fearlessly uphold the interests of his client, his conduct must conform to the Rules of Conduct and Etiquettes laid down in the said Chapter, both in letter and in spirit. 34. The role and the duty of the Advocates particularly Advocates-on- Record are contained in Order IV of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013. The relevant part of Rule 7 Order IV of the said Rules reads as under: "7. (a). .......... (b) (i) Where the vakalatnama is executed in the presence of the Advocate-on-Record, he shall certify that it was executed in his presence. (ii) Where the Advocate-on-Record merely accepts the vakalatnama which is already duly executed in the presence of a Notary or an advocate, he shall make an endorsement thereon that he has satisfied himself about the due execution of the vakalatnama." 35. The Special Leave Petitions civil or crimi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....l for filing online appearance slips in view of Office Circular dated 30.12.2022. It is further stated that it is not possible for the Court Masters to recognize every Advocate appearing in the Court rooms by face and therefore, they have to rely upon the appearance put in by the Advocates-on- Record. In case a Senior Advocate is appearing but his/her name is not reflected in the appearance slip, the Court Masters include their names. The said Circular/Notice dated 30.12.2022 relied upon by the AR-cum- PSs/Court Masters reads as under: "SUPREME COURT OF INDIA F.No.5/Judl./2022 Dated: 30th December, 2022 NOTICE Re: Activation of Portal of Filing Online Appearance Slips Take Notice that an Online Module has been developed to facilitate procedure of marking appearances of the Advocates in the Record of Proceedings, which is going to be activated from 02.01.2023. Take Notice that the Advocates-on-Record may mark the appearances of the Advocates appearing in the Court through the link provided on the website http://main.sci.gov.in and on the Office Mobile App of the Supreme Court of India. The said facility shall be available for the duration spanning from the publication of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed to mark his presence by furnishing online information. We cannot loose sight of the fact that furnishing such information may have bearing on the sanctity of the Court proceedings in the case. 5. We may hasten to observe that on the basis of the presence of the counsel in the proceedings, the advocates may be entitled to get certain benefits such as allotment of chamber, designation of senior advocates and other. In the long run, if the advocates, who are not present in the Court are permitted to mark their presence, it may have adverse impact on those Bar members who are appearing regularly. Therefore, for sanctity of the proceedings and for betterment of the Institution, online information ought to be submitted of only those advocates who are either appearing or assisting during hearing, personally or online. 6. In view of aforesaid, we forthwith direct that in this Court, online presence of only those advocates be furnished and be marked who are appearing or assisting during hearing as indicated above and not of those who are not present in Court but may be associated in office of the advocates. 7. As observed, we request the member of the Supreme Court Bar Association ....