Bail Frauds: This High Court issues Guidelines for containing instances of Fraud in seeking Bail

The Karnataka High Court in view of diminishing bail frauds, has issued directions to the Registry and District Courts across the State to evolve mechanisms to curb the practice of fraud on the court.

The single-judge bench of Justice H P Sandesh observed that in view of change of trend in committing the fraud on Court filing of memo of appearance should be avoided in case of petition filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. since the accused/petitioner will not be in custody.

The petitioner herein had filed multiple petitions before various courts seeking anticipatory bail and has suppressed this information from the Court in the present petition.

The Court thus noted that it is nothing but a fraud on the Court and stooped into the level of suppressing all the facts before the Court and an attempt is made to get the bail order by hook or crook at the hands of this Court.

In view of the above, the Court mentioned slew of Supreme Court judgements on the conduct of the seekers of justice, committed fraud on the Court.

Wanted To Stay Updated & keen to Gain Knowledge. Join us on Telegram Here. or What'sApp Here.

-Kishore Samrite Vs. State of U.P. & Ors., 2012 Latest Caselaw 606 SC wherein it was stated the principles that would govern the obligations of a litigant while approaching the court for redressal of any grievance and the consequences of abuse of process of court.

-DALIP SINGH vs STGATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND OTHER wherein the Apex Court taking note of abuse of process regarding new creed of dishonest litigants, noticed and strongly deprecated and further observed that denial of any relief to such persons and also held that for may centuries Indian society cherished two basic values of life i.e., “satya” and “ahimsa” propounded by Mahavir, Gautham Buddha and Mahatma Gandhi guided the people to ingrain these values in their daily life. 

-Subrata Roy Sahara Vs. Union of India and others, 2014 Latest Caselaw 336 SC wherein the Supreme Court heold that calculated psychological offensives and mind games adopted by counsel to seeks recusal of Judges, held, need to be strongly repulsed (as done herein) such tactics deprecated and similar approach commended to other courts when they experience such behaviour, held, any act of bench-hunting or bench-hopping or bench-avoiding cannot be allowed, Judge not to rescue himself from the matter unless he/she should not be hearing it for reasons of direct of indirect involvement. Further held, benchmark that justice must not only be done but should also appear to be done, has to be preserved at all costs.

Wanted To Stay Updated & keen to Gain Knowledge. Join us on Telegram Here. or What'sApp Here.

-M/s Sciemed Overseas Inc. Vs. BOC India Limited & Ors., 2016 Latest Caselaw 33 SC wherein the Court observed with regard to imposition of exemplary costs filing of false or misleading affidavit, imposition of cost fully justified of Rs.10 lakh on petitioner for filing a false or misleading affidavit in court and also observed that there is no reason to interfere with the impugned judgment and time granted to the petitioner to make deposit of costs.

The Court analysed the chronology of events in the present case and observed that it is clear that it is nothing but fraud on the Court and the petitioner has gone to the extent that by hook or crook, he has to get a bail order even the petitioner had indulged in committing fraud on the Court when the matter was pending before this Court, approached the different Courts at different districts and apart from that the said fact is not stated in the present petition and by suppressing the same, the present petition is filed.

"Hence here is a case of suppression of true facts and also committed fraud on the Court approaching the different forum furnishing the fake address and an attempt is made to get the bail order by hook or crook invoking the provisions under Section 438 of Cr.P.C and an attempt was made to pollute the stream of justice. The Court must ensure that its process is not abused and in order to prevent abuse of process of Court, Court would be duty bound to impose heavy cost. The stream of justice should not be allowed to be polluted by unscrupulous litigants ."

Wanted To Stay Updated & keen to Gain Knowledge. Join us on Telegram Here. or What'sApp Here.

In light of the above, following directions were issued to curb the ill-practice:

1. The registry and also to the District Courts all over the State to evolve mechanism with modern technology to curb the practice of fraud on the Court and verify every application for being filed for regular or anticipatory bail as to whether such similar petitions for bail has been made before any other Courts and issue necessary circulars with the approval of Hon'ble Chief Justice.

2.The Director of the Prosecution of the State shall instruct the Public Prosecutors of their respective States that they are duty bound to supply necessary information to the concerned Court regarding pendency or the decision of the earlier bail application of the accused in the same offence after taking information from the concerned Investigating Officer/Police official.

3. The registry and District Courts are directed to insist for vakalat when a bail petition is filed seeking for an anticipatory bail since the accused is not in custody in order to avoid fraud on the Court since the petitioner denies the very instructions given to the counsel and it is safer on the counsel also.

4.The registry is directed to issue a circular to the said effect and also make endeavour to identify the number of petitions being filed and make it clear that the first petition is maintainable and subsequent petitions are not maintainable to avoid bench hunting/bench hopping/bench avoiding.