NEW DELHI: A Delhi court has come down heavily on a litigant for what it described as a “mischievous” attempt to misuse judicial remedies, imposing a fine of Rs 10,000 and dismissing his petition. The court stressed that while access to justice is fundamental, it cannot be abused to create chaos, delay proceedings or obstruct the course of law.
The matter arose from a revision petition filed by Soumya Ranjan Kanungo, who challenged a magistrate’s August 2024 order refusing to stay a non-bailable warrant (NBW) issued against him in a cheque bounce case. Additional sessions judge Bhupinder Singh, in an order dated August 18, observed that the magistrate’s decision was correct, as the warrant was issued only to secure Kanungo’s appearance and did not affect his legal rights.
“Instead of submitting himself to the jurisdiction of the trial court, the revisionist has been trying to subvert the course of justice by filing the present revision petition,” the judge said, noting that the order under challenge was “purely interlocutory” and not open to revision.
He added that even on merits, the plea had no substance. The court also underscored Kanungo’s repeated absence from trial, pointing out that proceedings had been stalled for more than five years. “The trial court has rightly observed that the revisionist has taken undue advantage of the liberty granted to him,” the order stated.
It further recorded that “even in the present case, Kanungo took much liberty, and every time different counsel appeared on his behalf and sought adjournments for addressing the arguments.”
Expressing strong disapproval, Judge Singh said he was anguished and appalled by the litigant’s “insidious and cavalier approach”. The order also said, “In my view, liberal access to justice should not be construed by anyone as a means to lead to chaos and indiscipline, and frivolous petitions should be penalised with heavy costs.”
The court also emphasised that judicial resources must be preserved for genuine litigants. “A stern message is required to be sent to the litigants who indulge in frivolous and vexatious litigation, as such litigation not only clogs the arteries of the justice delivery system but also deprives genuine litigants of their fundamental right of speedy trial,” the judge said.