Indian courts, clearly reported

Rajasthan High Court Fines Lawyer ₹50K for Misleading Arguments

The Rajasthan High Court has penalized a lawyer ₹50,000 for presenting false claims to secure priority listing of cases. The ruling underscored the necessity of integrity between the legal profession and the judiciary.

Justice Rekha Borana reprimanded the appellants’ counsel for distorting facts, warning that misleading the court not only undermines the judicial process but also wastes valuable court time. The Court referenced Supreme Court rulings, emphasizing that deceiving the judiciary constitutes serious professional misconduct.

The case involved appeals against a March 6, 2024, decision by the additional district judge in Nagaur, which had dismissed the appellants’ applications. The trial court found no merit in their claims of long-term possession or pending regularization requests, concluding that the disputed land was primarily used for commercial purposes while the appellants had alternative residences.

During the High Court proceedings, the appellants’ counsel argued that they had occupied the land for over 40 years and sought regularization, which the local panchayat allegedly ignored. However, when directed to provide supporting documents, the submissions lacked specific land details, rendering them vague and unreliable.

The panchayat countered that the appellants had never applied for regularization before the trial court’s ruling and that their later applications involved different land. It also provided records and photographs proving that the land in question was used commercially. The High Court found the appellants’ arguments misleading, dismissing their appeal and affirming the lower court’s findings.

Additionally, the court rejected claims of selective action, noting that eviction notices were issued to all encroachers. It criticized the appellants’ counsel for falsely asserting the urgency of the case despite multiple adjournments since May 2024.

Concluding that the attempt to mislead the court warranted penal action, the High Court dismissed the appeals and imposed a ₹50,000 cost on the counsel, directing payment to the Litigants’ Welfare Fund within 15 days.

Share this story