Supreme Court directs CBI probe into filing of false case with fabricated documents

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday ordered the CBI inquiry into a case after a man denied filing a petition in connection with a rape and kidnapping case quashed by the Allahabad High Court against a key witness in the infamous 2002 Nitish Katara murder case.

A bench of Justices Bela M Trivedi and Satish Chandra Sharma said every advocate putting his signature on vakalatnamas and documents to be filed in courts, and every advocate appearing for a party in a court is presumed to have filed the proceedings and put his appearance with all sense of responsibility and seriousness.

No professional, much less a legal professional, is immune from being prosecuted for his criminal misdeeds, the bench said.

The court took note of extraordinary facts and circumstances of matter as the petitioner Bhagwan Singh claimed he did not file the case and he had never met any of lawyers representing him. The accused in the rape case Ajay Katara also said since he deposed in the 2002 case which led to conviction of son and nephew of Uttar Pradesh's gangster politician, former MP and Minister D P Yadav, he had been implicated in 37 false cases including the present one.

The bench said the matter assumed serious concern when the advocates who are the officers of the court are involved and when they actively participate in the ill-motivated litigations of the unscrupulous litigants, and assist them in misusing and abusing the process of law to achieve their ulterior purposes.

The court found that the High Court and Supreme Court were sought to be taken for a ride and when the entire justice delivery system was sought to be put to stake, by the respondent Sukhpal, Ms Rinki, son-in-law and daughter of Bhagwan Singh and their concerned associates and the advocates, who helped them in forging and fabricating the documents to be filed in the High Court and Supreme Court, and to pursue the false proceedings filed in the name of Bhagwan Singh without his knowledge, consent or authority.

The court directed the CBI probe and sought a report within two months. It fixed the matter for consideration of the CBI report on November 25.

In the case, petitioner Bhagwan Singh before the apex court denied having filed the instant petition against the Allahabad High Court's order quashing the criminal case against Ajay Katara.

Bhagwan Singh, who is the father of the alleged rape victim, claimed he never met his daughter since she eloped with Sukhpal in 2013.

In the matter, the bench noted Sukhpal, his wife Rinki with the able assistance of a battery of advocates in the Supreme Court namely AOR Anubhav Yashwant Yadav, R P S Yadav, Karan Singh Yadav along with the advocate and notary A N Singh, and a battery of advocates in the High Court namely Santosh Kumar Yadav, Jai Singh Yadav, Alok Kumar Yadav and Karan Singh Yadav and many other unknown persons had made brazen attempts to falsely implicate Ajay Katara by filing false proceedings in the name of Bhagwan Singh in the High Court and Supreme Court, by filing false and fabricated documents.

The bench said, "The courts are called the ‘Temple of Justice’. However, often brazen attempts are being made to abuse and misuse the process of law by committing frauds on courts. This is one of such cases where such an attempt has been made to pollute the stream of justice."

Reflecting upon the fate meted out to witness like Katara, the bench said, "The condition of witnesses in the Indian legal system is very pathetic. The witnesses are threatened, coerced by using force and lured by monetary considerations, at the instances of those who are in power, their henchmen and hirelings, with a view to smother and stifle truth, and to make mockery of justice."

Though the “Witness Protection Scheme, 2018” has been framed by the central government and approved by this Court in Mahendra Chawla vs. Union of India (2019), there is hardly any effective implementation of the same, the court said.

In the case, the bench said the acts of frauds were 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 on the courts.

"No court can allow itself to be used as an instrument of fraud and no Court can allow its eyes to be closed to the fact that it is being used as an instrument of fraud," the bench said.

The bench said wrongdoers must fear the law that they will be punished, innocents must be assured that they will not be prosecuted and victims must be confident that they will get justice.