9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (9) TMI 1928X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... writ petitioner upon his retirement on January 31, 2019. 3. The petitioner thereafter wrote to the school authorities on May 8, 2018 requesting the authorities to submit his pension papers to the concerned authorities. The petitioner thereafter replied to the letter dated April] 2, 2018 vide his letter dated June 5, 2018 posted on June 6, 2018 seeking the details of his service book in relation to the leave availed by him from May 1, 2009 till date. 4. The petitioner has not annexed any supporting documents wherein he has submitted the leave records to the school authorities. 5. Mr. Biswajit De, counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No. 5 submits that there is gross suppression of material facts before this Court amounting to an abuse of process of Court, as the writ petitioner has suppressed the documents in relation to leave that has been enjoyed by him from 1991 to 2018. He submits that the leave records were reconstructed as per the discussion with the petitioner on May 28, 2018 and the same was also handed over to the petitioner on July 6, 2018. Documents evidencing receipt by the petitioner were handed over to the Court. 6. Counsel appearing for respondent No. 5 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... writ petitioner, there is nothing wrong with the above letters. 12. The only question that arises In this writ petition is whether this Court sitting in its writ jurisdiction should take note of the material suppression by the writ petitioner and dismiss this writ petition. It is trite law that a petitioner has to come with clean hands and has to disclose the relevant materials and act in good faith. Any departure from the same may lead to a dismissal of a writ petition at the very threshold. At this juncture, I embark on an examination of the definition of fraud, fraudulent concealment and the doctrine of clean hands, and thereafter, on how Courts in the past have handled such situations. 13. 'Fraud', according to Black's law Dictionary, 10th Edition, is a knowing misrepresentation or knowing concealment of a material fact made to induce another to act to his or her detriment; a reckless misrepresentation made without justified belief in its truth to induce another person to act; a tort arising from a knowing or reckless misrepresentation or concealment of material fact made to induce another to act to his or her detriment. 14. 'Fraudulent concealment" as defin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mes to the Court, must come with clean hands. We are constrained to say that more often than not, process of the Court is being abused. Property-grabbers, tax-evaders, bank-loan dodgers and other unscrupulous persons from a J1 walks of life find the Court-process a convenient lever to retain the illegal gains indefinitely. We have no hesitation to say that a person, whose case is based on falsehood, has no right to approach the Court. He can be summarily thrown out at any stage of litigation. 6. ...A fraud is an act of deliberate deception with the design of securing something by taking advantage of another. It is a deception in order to gain by another's loss. It is a cheating intended to get an advantage of another........ A litigant, who approaches the Court, is bound to produce all the documents executed by him, which are relevant to the litigation. If he withholds a vital document in order to gain advantage on the other side then he would be guilty of playing fraud on the Court as well as on the opposite party." 19. In a well-known Calcutta High Court case in Chittaranjan Das vs. Durgapore Project Ltd. & Ors. reported in 99 CWN 897 [Coram: Satya Brata Sinha and Basudeva ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s discretionary. A party may by his conduct preclude himself from claiming the writ ex debito justitiae, no matter whether the proceedings which he seeks to quash are void or voidable. If they are void it is true that no conduct of his will validate them; but such considerations do not affect the principles on which the Court acts in granting or refusing the writ of certiorari. This special remedy will not be granted ex debito justitiae to a person who fails to state in his evidence on moving for the rule nisi that at the time of the proceedings impugned he was unaware of the facts on which he relics to impugn them." 23. As seen from the various judgments discussed above, the Indian and English Courts have consistently taken the view that one who approaches the Court must come with clean hands. It is the bounden duty of the Court to keep the stream of justice absolutely clean. Anyone who approaches must give full and fair disclosure of all the materials. The Courts must not allow anyone to abuse the Court process. In case the petitioner conceals anything that is known to be material such an action would lead to an inference of fraud, and even if not fraud, definitely would lead to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed that the writ jurisdiction is a discretionary jurisdiction and the Court applying its judicial discretion may refuse to entertain this writ petition when appraised of the facts that the writ petitioner has not acted uberrima fides. 29. Before finally pronouncing my decision, I must state that this Court, in all fairness gave an opportunity, after hearing and going through the documents produced by the respondents, to the petitioner to withdraw the writ petition (with liberty to file afresh with better particulars). However, Mr. Saktipada Jana appearing on behalf of the petitioner, refused and pressed the writ petition unabated. One is reminded of the saying, "you can take a horse to the well, but cannot for it to drink". In view of the same, I dismiss the writ petition in limine. I am of the view that exemplary costs should be awarded. However, compassionate plea made by Mr. Jana, the order as to costs is limited to Rs. 5,000/- only, payable to the West Bengal State Legal Services Authority, Kolkata, within two weeks from date. 30. All parties are to act on the server copy of this order. 31. Documents handed over by the respondent No. S in Court should be kept on record. 32. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
