REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

Hs Bedi Appellant

V/S

NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

RAMNANDAN PRASAD NARAYAN SINGH V. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,PATNA [REFERRED TO]
JAMATRAJ KEWALJI GOVANI VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
JASRAJ INDER SJNGH VS. HEMRAJ MULTANCHAND [REFERRED TO]
T ARIVANDANDAM VS. T V SATYAPAL [REFERRED TO]
RAM CHANDER VS. STATE OF HARYANA [REFERRED TO]
UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION VS. UNION OF INDIA ANA SWASTHYA KENDRA BHOPAL M P ZAHREELI GAS KAND SANGHARSH MORCHA BHOPAL [REFERRED TO]
MOHANLALSHAMJISONI VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
S P CHENGALVARAYA NAIDU VS. JAGANNATH [REFERRED TO]
CHANDRA SHASHI VS. ANIL KUMAR VERMA [REFERRED TO]
A S NARAYANA DEEKSHITULU VS. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF RAJASTHAN VS. ANI ALIAS HANIF [REFERRED TO]
MOHAN SINGH VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
SWARAN SINGH VS. STATE OF PANJAB [REFERRED TO]
ZAHIRA HABIBULLA H SHEIKH VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [REFERRED TO]
ZAHIRA HABIBULLAH SHEIKH VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [REFERRED TO]
HIMANSHU SINGH SABHARWAL VS. STATE OF M P [REFERRED TO]
DALIP SINGH VS. STATE OF U P [REFERRED TO]
RITESH TEWARI VS. STATE OF UP [REFERRED TO]
RAMRAMESHWARI DEVI VS. NIRMALA DEVI [REFERRED TO]
MARIA MARGARIDA SEQUERIA FERNANDES VS. ERASMO JACK DE SEQUERIA DEAD THROUGH L RS [REFERRED TO]
A. SHANMUGAM VS. ARIYA KSHATRIYA RAJAKULA VAMSATHU MADALAYA NANDHAVANA PARIPALANAI SANGAM REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT ETC [REFERRED TO]
RAMESH HARIJAN VS. STATE OF UP [REFERRED TO]
SANJEEV KUMAR MITTAL VS. STATE [REFERRED TO]
SATYENDRA SINGH VS. GULAB SINGH [REFERRED TO]
SESSIONS JUDGE NELLORE REFERRING OFFICER VS. INTHA RAMANA REDDY [REFERRED TO]
NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD VS. BABLOO PAL [REFERRED TO]
A HIRIYANNA GOWDA VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [REFERRED TO]
DEDPUTY LEGAL REMEMBRANCER AND PUBLIC PROSECUTOR OF BIHAR AND ORISSA VS. RAM UDAR SINGH [REFERRED TO]
BHIMANNA VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [REFERRED TO]
KISHORE SAMRITE VS. STATE OF U.P [REFERRED TO]
VED PARKASH KHARBANDA VS. VIMAL BINDAL [REFERRED TO]
SUBRATA ROY SAHARA VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
PADMAWATI AND ORS. VS. HARIJAN SEWAK SANGH [REFERRED TO]
SEEMA THAKUR VS. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In Subrata Roy Sahara v. Union of India, (2014) 8 SCC 470, J.S. Khehar, J. observed that the Indian judicial system is grossly afflicted with frivolous litigation and ways and means need to be evolved to deter litigants from their compulsive obsession towards senseless and ill -considered claims. The Supreme Court, discussed the menace of frivolous litigation. Relevant portions of the said judgment are as under:

(2.) The greatest challenge before the judiciary today is the frivolous litigation. The judicial system in the country is choked with false claims and such litigants are consuming Courts' time for a wrong cause. False claims are a huge strain on the judicial system. Perjury has become a way of life in the Courts. False pleas are often taken and forged documents are filed indiscriminately in the Courts. The reluctance of the Courts to order prosecution encourage the litigants to make false averments in pleadings before the Court. Section 209 of the Indian Penal Code, which provides an effective mechanism to curb the menace of frivolous litigation, has been seldom invoked.

(3.) An important question of law of public interest relating to the scope of Section 209 of Indian Penal Code has arisen for consideration before this Court. Section 209 of the Indian Penal Code provides that dishonestly making a false claim in a Court is an offence punishable with punishment of imprisonment upto two years and fine. Section 209 of the Indian Penal Code is reproduced hereunder: -

Click here to view full judgment.

HS BEDI Vs. NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address