Ambalal Parihar vs State of Rajasthan & Ors.

Court

Supreme Court of India

Date

16 October 2023

Case No.

Criminal Appeal No. 3233 of 2023

Result

Allowed

Bench

Abhay S. Oka, Pankaj Mithal

Citation

[2023] 15 S.C.R. 213 : 2023 INSC 946

Issue for consideration

Impugned order passed in Civil Writ Petition, filed by the second to fourth respondents for clubbing of eight FIRs filed against them, directing that no coercive action be taken against the aforesaid respondents in connection with the said FIRs, if justified. Administration of Justice – Abuse of process of law – Forum hunting – Six FIRs were registered against the second to fourth respondents, at the instance of the appellant – Two other FIRs were also registered against them by some other first informants, respondents sought quashing thereof, however, no interim relief was granted – Then a Writ Petition was filed on the civil side by the aforesaid respondents for clubbing the eight FIRs – Single Judge directed that no coercive action be taken against the respondents in connection with all eight FIRs – Appellant alleged forum hunting by respondents stating that the Civil Writ Petition for consolidation of eight FIRs was filed to avoid the roster Judge who had not granted interim relief:

Headnote

Held: Action of filing Civil Writ Petition by the respondents was nothing but a gross abuse of process of law and it was a classic case of forum hunting – It is wondered how a Civil Writ Petition for clubbing FIRs could be entertained – In the roster notified by the Chief Justice, there is a separate roster for Criminal Writ Petitions – If the Courts allow such sharp practices, the roster notified by the Chief Justice will have no meaning – The Judges have to follow discipline and ought not to take up any case unless it is specifically assigned by the Chief Justice – A Judge can take up a case provided either the cases of that category have been assigned to him as per the notified roster or the particular case is specifically assigned by the Chief Justice – Taking up a case not specifically assigned by the Chief Justice is an act of gross impropriety – Though a Civil Writ Petition was filed, the Judge ought to have converted it into a Criminal Writ Petition which could have been placed only before the roster Judge taking up Criminal Writ Petitions – Civil Writ Petition dismissed – Therefore, the impugned order does not survive – Costs of Rs.50,000/- imposed on the respondents – The conduct of the respondents be brought to the notice of the concerned Court which is hearing petitions u/s.482, CrPC filed by them for quashing FIRs – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.482. [Paras 7, 8 and 10] OTHER CASE DETAILS INCLUDING IMPUGNED

ORDER AND APPEARANCES

JUDGMENT / ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT JUDGMENT ABHAY S.OKA, J. Leave granted. 2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. 3. This is a shocking case of gross abuse of process of law by the second to fourth respondents. At the instance of the appellant, six First Information Reports were registered against the second to fourth respondents. There were two other First Information Reports registered against the same respondents by some other first informants. Two Criminal Miscellaneous Petitions were filed by the second to fourth respondents for quashing the First Information Repo

View Subscription Plans →