*Dismisses petition for suppression, imposes costs
Excelsior Correspondent
JAMMU, Apr 23: Emphasising that a litigant must approach the court with clean hands, clean mind and complete candour and suppression of facts amounts to playing fraud upon the court, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has dismissed a writ petition as utterly misconceived and an abuse of the process of law, with Rs 50,000 costs.
Delivering judgment in a writ petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India by three residents of Harnoo tehsil of Budgam district, Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal came down heavily on the petitioners for concealing crucial facts and attempting to secure relief through parallel proceedings.
The case arose from a challenge to an order dated March 24, 2026, passed by the Court of Sub-Judge/Special Mobile Magistrate, Budgam, directing the Tehsildar to implement an earlier order. However, during the hearing, it was brought to the notice of the High Court that the petitioners had already approached the same court seeking suspension of the order.
The trial court, after hearing both sides, had passed an order on April 6, 2026, directing that the impugned order shall not be executed till further orders and restraining the respondents from proceeding with its execution. Despite this development, the petitioners failed to disclose the order before the High Court.
Taking serious note, Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal observed, “once the execution of the impugned order already stood stayed by the court concerned, there was no occasion for the petitioners to invoke the supervisory jurisdiction of this court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India seeking quashment of the same order. The filing of the present petition, therefore, appears to be wholly unnecessary and misconceived”.
“The petitioners had not only suppressed the material fact of the stay order but had also concealed the filing and dismissal of an earlier writ petition on the same issue before a Coordinate Bench”, the High Court said and held that such suppression was deliberate and aimed at misleading the court to obtain interim relief.
Agreeing with the arguments of the respondents, the High Court ruled that the petition fell squarely within the realm of abuse of the process of the court as the grievance projected had already been redressed by the competent court.
“It is well settled that a litigant invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of this court must come with clean hands, clean mind and complete candour and is under a bounden obligation to disclose all material facts which have a bearing on the adjudication of the case”, the High Court said, adding “suppression or concealment of material facts is not a mere irregularity, but amounts to playing fraud upon the court”.
It further held, “the duty to disclose is absolute and extends not only to facts which support the case of the party, but equally to those which are adverse to it. Any attempt to mislead the court strikes at the very root of the administration of justice and undermines the confidence reposed in judicial proceedings”.
The High Court also relied on the Supreme Court judgment in Auroville Foundation Vs Natasha Storey and earlier High Court rulings to reiterate that petitions involving suppression of facts are liable to be dismissed without going into merits.
Holding that the petitioners had indulged in concealment and attempted to overreach the judicial process, the High Court observed that a litigant who seeks to pollute the stream of justice is not entitled to any relief.
Declaring the petition as utterly misconceived and devoid of any merit, the High Court dismissed it and imposed costs of Rs 50,000, directing the petitioners to deposit the amount with the Registry within two weeks. The High Court further directed that the matter be listed on May 15, 2026, for compliance in case the costs are not deposited within the stipulated time.
Follow our WhatsApp channel
