New Delhi, September 28, 2023 – In a significant turn of events, the Supreme Court of India recently uncovered a shocking case of a fabricated document purportedly issued by the Court itself. This revelation has led to a swift and decisive action by the Court, ordering a criminal investigation into the matter.
The Incident came to light during the scrutiny of a Special Leave Petition (SLP) that involved two crucial orders dated July 25, 2022, issued by the same Bench. The first order indicated a dismissal, while the second, rather perplexingly, suggested approval of the SLP. However, the Court’s official records clearly showed that the SLP had been dismissed.
This case has not only raised concerns about the integrity of legal proceedings but also implicated specific sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). Section 463 of the IPC deals with the offense of forgery, which involves making a false document with the intent to deceive or injure someone. In this case, the fabrication of an order of the Supreme Court itself would fall under the purview of this section.
Additionally, Section 464 of the IPC addresses the making of a false document as genuine, intending that it should be used as genuine. If it is determined that the fabricated document was intended to be used as a genuine order of the Supreme Court, the individuals responsible may be liable under this section as well.
The matter took a more serious turn when a concerned litigant filed a complaint regarding the authenticity of these orders. Following a careful examination of the pertinent documents, the Court took immediate action by instructing the Registrar (Judicial) to conduct an inquiry into the matter and furnish a comprehensive report. Significantly, the Court explicitly stated that if the Registrar’s findings revealed any fabrication of its orders, criminal proceedings would be initiated.
Upon the submission of the Registrar’s report, the Court reached a conclusive decision that the order marked as Annexure-III in the SLP was indeed a fabricated document. Furthermore, the Court noted the absence of the concerned advocate during this process and deemed it necessary for the investigating agency to scrutinize the advocate’s potential involvement.
To ensure the expeditious handling of this sensitive issue, the Court directed the Registrar to include a copy of its order, along with the referenced annexures, when filing a formal complaint. Additionally, the Court urged the Officer in-charge of the relevant Police Station to provide a detailed investigation report within two months from the date of the order.
This development has raised serious concerns regarding the integrity of legal proceedings and the potential repercussions of fabricating court documents. Legal experts are closely following the case, emphasizing the need for a thorough investigation to identify all parties involved and to uphold the sanctity of the justice system.
The Court’s swift response in ordering a criminal investigation underscores its commitment to maintaining the highest standards of justice and preserving the integrity of its orders. As this case unfolds, it serves as a stark reminder of the importance of transparency and accountability within the legal framework. The outcome of this investigation will undoubtedly have far-reaching implications for the legal community and the trust of citizens in the judicial process.
Lastly, the Supreme Court’s pursuit of a criminal investigation in this matter demonstrates its commitment to upholding the law and ensuring justice is served. As the case progresses, it will test the effectiveness of relevant sections of the IPC in addressing offenses related to document forgery and misrepresentation within the judicial system.