Supreme Court orders CBI probe after application filed without litigant’s knowledge

The Supreme Court on Friday directed the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to investigate the filing of a fraudulent special leave application (SLP) that was filed without the knowledge of the applicant, Bhagwan Singh.

The investigation was ordered after a plaintiff denied filing an appeal in a case, claiming he never instructed any of the lawyers present in court to file suit on his behalf.

A two-judge bench comprising Bela M. Trivedi and Satish Chandra Sharma expressed concern over the attempt to deceive both the High Court and the Supreme Court and stated that the judicial system was compromised by those responsible for forging and tampering with court documents.

“Considering the gravity and seriousness with which the High Court and the Supreme Court were attempted to hoodwink. Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 and their concerned associates and advocates were attempting to jeopardise the entire judicial system by forging and fabricating the documents to be filed before the courts and initiating false proceedings in the name of Bhagwan Singh without his consent, knowledge and authority, we find it appropriate to hand over the investigation in this case to the CBI,” the court said.

The court ordered the CBI to conduct a preliminary investigation and, if necessary, register a regular case. “The CBI shall investigate all the links leading to the commission of the alleged crime and submit a report to the court within two months,” the judgment said.

Fraud in court

The verdict emphasized the seriousness of the offense, stating: “Perpetrators must fear the law and victims must have confidence that justice will be done to them.” It was noted that this case was not only a fraud against people, but also against the justice system.

The court warned that no court should be misused as an instrument of fraud and that those responsible for filing false documents and proceedings would be punished under the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) 2023.

RESPONSIBILITIES OF REPRESENTATIVES

The court clarified that advocates-on-record must ensure that only authorized attorneys appear and represent cases. They emphasized that any changes in representation must be promptly reported to the court.

The ruling also highlighted that lawyers, as court officials, are expected to act responsibly and in accordance with professional ethics. “No lawyer is immune from prosecution for criminal conduct,” the court stated.

“The matter is of serious concern when lawyers acting as officers of the court are involved in the litigation and actively participate in the malicious litigation of unscrupulous plaintiffs and assist them in abusing and misusing the legal process to achieve their own ends,” the court observed.

NOTARY MISTAKES

The court warned that any omissions by a notary would be considered misconduct, making the person unfit for the task.

The court ordered that a copy of the judgment be forwarded to the Bar Council of India and the Government of India for further action. The case arose when the plaintiff, Bhagwan Singh, claimed that he was unaware of the lawyers who had filed the bar application on his behalf.