BHAGWAN SINGH versus STATE OF U.P. & ORS.

Citation: [2024] 9 S.C.R. 774 · Decided: 20-09-2024 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: BELA M. TRIVEDI · Disposal: Disposed off

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · cites 3 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

[2024] 9 S.C.R. 774 : 2024 INSC 708
Bhagwan Singh 
v. 
State of U.P. & Ors.
(Criminal Appeal No(s). 3883-3884 of 2024)
20 September 2024
[Bela M. Trivedi* and Satish Chandra Sharma, JJ.]
Issue for Consideration
Respondent Nos.3 and 4, son-in-law and daughter of the petitioner 
respectively, made attempts to falsely implicate the Respondent 
No.2-a star witness in the Nitish Katara case on whose evidence the 
accused son and nephew of Ex-Minister and M.P. Mr. D.P. Yadav 
were convicted, by filing various false proceedings in the name of 
the petitioner without his knowledge, consent or authority in the 
High Court and Supreme Court with the assistance of a battery 
of advocates and many other unknown persons. Present SLP 
was filed against Respondent No.2 in the name of the petitioner 
against the order allowing the Respondent No.2’s application 
u/s.482, CrPC quashing the criminal proceedings against him 
and another order rejecting the recall application filed against the 
aforesaid order. Affidavit of the petitioner was notarized by the 
Notary in his absence and was submitted with the SLP memo. 
Petitioner denied filing any SLP and stated that the same was 
falsely filed in his name.
Headnotes†
Abuse of process of law – Fraud on Court – False proceedings 
filed in the name of the petitioner in the High Court and 
Supreme Court without his knowledge, consent or authority 
by filing false and fabricated vakaltnamas, affidavit – Whether 
the Respondent Nos.3 and 4 made attempts to falsely implicate 
the Respondent No.2 by filing the aforesaid false proceedings 
with the assistance of advocates:
Held: Yes – Respondent No.2 is being made to suffer for being 
witness in the Nitish Katara case by continuously targeting him with 
false and frivolous cases, including the present one at the behest of 
Yadav family and their associates – To create or to assist creating 
false documents and to use them as genuine knowing them to be 
* Author
[2024] 9 S.C.R. 
775
Bhagwan Singh v. State of U.P. & Ors.
false in the Court proceedings, to falsely implicate somebody in 
the false proceedings filed in the name of the person who had no 
knowledge whatsoever about the same are punishable offences – 
They are acts of frauds committed not only on the person sought to 
be falsely implicated and on the person in whose name such false 
proceedings are filed without his knowledge and consent, but also 
a fraud committed on the Courts – In the present case, High Court 
and Supreme Court were taken for a ride and the entire justice 
delivery system was put to stake by the respondent nos.3 and 4, 
their associates and the Advocates, who helped them in forging and 
fabricating the documents filed in the High Court and Supreme Court, 
and to pursue the false proceedings filed in the name of the petitioner 
without his knowledge, consent or authority – In the extraordinary 
facts and circumstances, considering the gravity and seriousness of 
the case, investigation handed over to the CBI – CBI to register the 
regular case, after holding preliminary inquiry if necessary, against 
all the persons found involved and responsible, and shall investigate 
all the links leading to the commission of the alleged crimes and 
fraud on court – Director, CBI to do the needful in this regard and 
submit the report within two months. [Paras 26, 29, 32]
Notaries Act 1952 – Notaries Rules 1956 – r.11 – Acts or 
omissions on the part of the Notary in violation thereof – 
Affidavit of the petitioner was notarized by the Notary in his 
absence and the said affidavit was submitted with the SLP 
memo – Notary did not make the entry of the said attestation 
in the Notarial Register – Petitioner denied filing any SLP 
stating that the same was falsely filed in his name:
Held: Any acts or omissions on the part of the Notary in violation 
of r.11, would amount to misconduct and the Notary complained 
against would be unfit to be a Notary – Registry to send a copy 
of the order to the Bar Council of India and the Government of 
India for perusal and action as deemed necessary. [Paras 37, 38]
Justice Delivery System – Role of advocates – Ethics – 
Degradation of the professional ethics on rise – Filing of false 
false and fabricated documents in Court:
Held: Legal professionals are not immune from being prosecuted 
for their criminal misdeeds – There is a great sanctity attached to 
the proceedings conducted in the court – Advocates putting their 
signatures on the Vakalat

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.