A division bench consisting of Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra noted that, despite specific provisions in the Supreme Court Rules of 2013 requiring a special leave petition (SLP) to be accompanied by a certified copy of the challenged judgment or order, these provisions are frequently violated.
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court of India has recently issued practice directions to ensure that litigants file certified copies of the orders and judgments of High Courts and lower courts that are being challenged before the top court.
READ ALSO: How SOP in Filing SLP Paper Books Benefits Legal Proceedings| Supreme Court
A division bench consisting of Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra noted that, despite specific provisions in the Supreme Court Rules of 2013 requiring a special leave petition (SLP) to be accompanied by a certified copy of the challenged judgment or order, these provisions are frequently violated.
The court, observed that such a situation should not be allowed to persist, and that there needs to be substantial compliance with the existing rules. The court has, therefore, issued the following directions:
- If any SLP, arising out of civil or criminal proceedings, is accompanied by an application for exemption from filing the certified copy of the judgment or order under challenge, the application must have, as an annexure, the receipt provided by the concerned section/department of the High Court as acknowledgment of the applicant’s request for the certified copy.
- The application must also contain an averment that the application for the certified copy has not lapsed due to non-filing of requisites or otherwise, and an undertaking to place the certified copy on record as soon as it is received.
- The Secretary General of the Supreme Court has been directed to bring the order to the notice of all concerned by issuing an appropriate circular, and this practice direction will be observed by all litigants who propose to file SLPs, both on the civil and criminal sides, with effect from August 20, 2024.
The court took a serious note of the issue while hearing an SLP against a Calcutta High Court order in a criminal case. The court found that the appellants had made an incorrect statement about having applied for the certified copy of the High Court order, and dismissed the SLP as well as the application for condonation of delay.
The Court instructed the Secretary General of the Supreme Court to notify all relevant parties by issuing a suitable circular about the new directive.
“This practice direction must be followed by all litigants filing special leave petitions, both civil and criminal, starting from August 20, 2024,”
the bench decreed.
The senior counsel later admitted that the petitioners had made an incorrect statement before the Court.
“We could have directed the Registry to initiate criminal proceedings against the petitioners for this issue, but considering Mr. Siddharth Bhatnagar’s earnest appeal that the petitioners may not be entirely at fault, we choose not to pursue that course,”
the Court remarked.
Given the circumstances, the Court dismissed both the SLP and the application for condonation of a 774-day delay.
In its detailed review, the Court observed that many applications seek exemption from submitting certified copies of judgments and orders.
“Generally, the Court accepts the statements made in these applications as true. This lenient approach has led litigants to believe they can avoid consequences even when their statements are false. It’s crucial to instill discipline to prevent the Court from being misled,”
the Court stated.
The Bench noted that many special leave petitions are dismissed on the first day of listing without the petitioner filing a certified copy, and no undertaking is required from litigants to submit the certified copy once it is provided by the relevant high court section or department.
READ ALSO: Asaram Bapu Urgently Seeks Medical Treatment, Filed SLP Before Rajasthan High Court
The court observed that such applications seeking exemption from filing certified copies are filed in a vast majority of cases, and the court’s mild approach in accepting the statements made in such applications has generated a sense of belief among litigants that they can get away with making statements that are far from the truth. The court emphasized the need to instill a sense of discipline and ensure that the court is not taken for a ride.
Case Title: Harsh Buwalka and Others v. Sanjay Kumar Bajoria
