DALIP SINGH Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) For many centuries, Indian society cherished two basic values of life i.e., 'Satya' (truth) and 'Ahimsa' (non-violence). Mahavir, Gautam Buddha and Mahatma Gandhi guided the people to ingrain these values in their daily life. Truth constituted an integral Dart of justice delivery system which was in vogue in pre-independence era and the people used to feel proud to tell truth in the courts irrespective of the consequences. However, post-independence period has seen drastic changes in our value system. The materialism has over-shadowed the old ethos and the quest for personal gain has become so intense that those involved in litigation do no hesitate to take shelter of falsehood, misrepresentation and suppression of facts in the court proceedings. In last 40 years, a new creed of litigants has cropped up. Those who belong to this creed do not have any respect for truth. They shamelessly resort to falsehood and unethical means for achieving their goals. In order to meet the challenge posed by this new creed of litigants, the courts have, from time to time, evolved new rules and it is now well established that a litigant, who attempts to pollute the stream of justice or who touches the pure fountain of justice with tainted hands, is not entitled to any relief, interim or final.

(2.) In Hari Narain v. Badri Das, 1963 AIR(SC) 1558, this Court adverted to the aforesaid rule and revoked the leave granted to the appellant by making the following observations:

(3.) In Welcome Hotel and Ors. v. State of Andhra Pradesh and Ors., 1983 AIR(SC) 1015, the Court held that a party which has misled the Court in passing an order in its favour is not entitled to be heard on the merits of the case.