‘Abuse of Process': Delhi HC Imposes Rs 1.25 Lakh Cost on Advocate for Filing Five Repetitive Pleas Against Real Estate Group

The Delhi High Court has slapped an advocate with a Rs 1.25 lakh fine for filing five repetitive petitions against a real estate company, noting that he concealed the pendency of earlier pleas and misused the process of law.

A single-judge bench led by Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora passed the order while hearing a plea filed by Advocate Gulshan Babbar, seeking directions to statutory authorities, including the Directorate of Enforcement (ED) and the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), to probe the alleged siphoning of funds by real estate company M/s IREO Residences Company Pvt. Ltd. and its directors, Lalit Goyal and Sapna.

However, the High Court dismissed all five petitions, observing that Babbar had made a false declaration of non-filing and misrepresented the contents of earlier court orders.

".....a cost of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees twenty-five thousand only) for each petition is imposed upon the Petitioner for knowingly concealing the pendency of other petitions, making a false declaration of non-filing, and misrepresenting the contents of the previous orders passed by this Court," the Court directed.

Noting that Babbar had no locus standi to maintain the petitions, the Court observed that he had falsely declared himself to be a homebuyer and claimed his hard-earned money had been duped. However, during submissions, it became clear that he was neither a homebuyer nor an aggrieved party, and had no direct connection with the projects in question.

The High Court also took note of the submissions made by the Enforcement Directorate (ED)'s counsel, who informed the Court that a probe into the alleged scam had already been initiated. It was submitted that an ECIR had been registered, a prosecution complaint had been filed, one of the directors had been arrested, and properties worth ₹1,376 crore had been attached.

Taking note of these facts, the Court found no grounds to interfere or issue further directions. However, it noted that the petitioner had approached the Court with unclean hands, having failed to disclose relevant details despite being an advocate by profession and fully aware of legal procedures and the obligation to depose truthfully while filing affidavits.

"In view of the foregoing, all the writ petitions filed by the Petitioner are dismissed on the grounds of lack of locus standi and non-maintainability," the Court stated.

Accordingly, the High Court ordered that the total cost of Rs 1,25,000 be deposited with the Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee (DHCLSC) within two weeks, with an affidavit of compliance to be filed within one week thereafter.

Case Title: GULSHAN BABBAR ADVOCATE versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS

Read order here: