The Punjab & Haryana High Court has dismissed a petition seeking the registration of an FIR against judicial officers and lawyers on allegations of illegally grabbing public property. The court found the petition to be contemptuous, baseless, and an attempt to undermine the judiciary’s dignity, imposing a fine of ₹25,000 on the petitioner.
While rejecting the petition, Justice N.S. Shekhawat remarked that the petitioner’s arrogant and contemptuous approach would not affect the dignity of the judiciary. The court emphasized that the dignity of the court is not so fragile that it could be shattered by "a stone thrown by a madman."
Read Also - Delhi High Court Takes Action Against 'Dummy Schools' Enabling Students to Skip Classes
The court further noted that the petition was filed with the intent to scandalize the judiciary and interfere with its functioning rather than to seek genuine legal redress.
Case Background
The petitioner, Suresh Kumar, who identified himself as a lawyer, had filed the petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). He accused four judicial officers and two advocates of misusing their positions to grab public property.
Read Also - Supreme Court Directs Assam Government to Expedite Deportation of 63 Declared Foreigners
The petitioner also alleged that judicial officers had shown favoritism by fast-tracking certain cases while delaying others without valid reasons. He further demanded that the case be handed over to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) or a senior judicial officer for an independent probe.
The court held that a petition seeking the registration of an FIR under Section 482 CrPC is not maintainable, as the law provides alternative remedies. If an FIR is not registered by the police, the complainant must first approach the Superintendent of Police. If that does not work, the complainant can file a petition before a magistrate under Section 156(3) CrPC.
Read Also - Supreme Court: Appeals Under NIA Act Cannot Be Dismissed Due to Delay Beyond 90 Days
The Supreme Court ruling in Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P. (2008 AIR SC 907) was cited, which states that high courts should discourage direct petitions for FIR registration when other legal remedies are available.
The court also pointed out that the petitioner failed to provide any concrete evidence to support his allegations. Despite accusing the respondents of grabbing public property, he did not mention a single specific property in the entire petition. The allegations were found to be vague, speculative, and lacking legal merit.
The court expressed serious concern over the increasing trend of litigants filing frivolous petitions to defame judicial officers and influence legal proceedings.
It emphasized that a litigant cannot be permitted to intimidate or browbeat the judiciary simply because they disagree with a court’s decision. Filing a petition in person does not give an individual the right to make unfounded allegations against judges and legal professionals.
Read Also - Supreme Court: Laws Protecting Women from Dowry Harassment Should Not Be Misused
The high court dismissed the petition with a fine of ₹25,000, payable to the PGI Poor Patient Welfare Fund, Chandigarh. The court also warned the petitioner against filing such baseless petitions in the future and stated that any further attempts to misuse the legal system could result in contempt of court proceedings.
The court directed that if the fine is not paid within two months, the amount will be recovered as arrears of land revenue.
Case Title : Suresh Kumar v. State of Haryana and others
