Jahanvi Agarwal
The Supreme Court recently encountered a petition in which a falsified document was presented as an order issued by the Supreme Court itself, which was a significant development.
When the Court recognized that the order was fraudulent, it ordered a criminal investigation.
The bench comprising Justices Abhay S Oka and Pankaj Mithal ordered that:
“It is obvious from the report (of the registrar) that the document purporting to be a copy of the order of this Court which is marked by Annexure-III in the report is a fabricated document. Therefore, the Registrar (Judicial Listing) must set the criminal law in motion by lodging a complaint with the jurisdictional police station.”
The case involved a Special Leave Petition (SLP), which had two orders of the Court in Annexures A and B, both dated July 25, 2022 and issued by the same bench. Interestingly, the second order—which came after the first one—allowed the SLP. Also worth mentioning is that the case was, in fact, dismissed by the Court, according to court documents.
A significant complaint was submitted by a party to the dispute with regard to this matter. The Registrar (Judicial) was ordered by the Court on August 22 to conduct an investigation into this matter and submit a report to the Court after reviewing the pertinent documents.
It’s essential to keep in mind that the Court made it plain right away that the criminal law would have to be activated if the Registrar determined that the orders of this Court were being fabricated.
The Court concluded after looking over the Registrar’s report that it is obvious that the court order included as one of the SLP’s annexures was false.
The Court further noted that despite receiving a warning, the concerned lawyers did not show up there. The Court ruled that the investigative agency should look into the alleged role that the lawyer played.
The bench ordered the Registrar to include the annexures mentioned in his report and a copy of this judgment when filing a complaint. Last but not least, the Court ordered the Officer in Charge of the concerned Police Station to produce a report regarding the investigation, within a period of two months from the date of order, to guarantee prompt investigation of the stated problem.
Case Name: Manish Madanmohan Agarwal v. Satyanarayan Dhulichandji Agrawal
Diary Number: 167-168/2023
Bench: Justices Abhay S Oka and Pankaj Mithal