'Hiding Facts Is Playing Fraud on Court': Allahabad HC Fines Man Rs. 15K for Abusing PIL Process

In a strong rebuke to frivolous litigation and abuse of judicial process, the Allahabad High Court has dismissed a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by one Manish Kumar, imposing a cost of Rs. 15,000 for suppressing material facts and allegedly using the court to settle personal scores.

The bench of Justice Kshitij Shailendra observed that the PIL was nothing but a “gross misuse and abuse of the process of law.” Court noted that the petitioner had previously filed a PIL regarding the same property and involving the same respondent (No. 6), which he had withdrawn without taking any liberty to refile.

Despite this, the petitioner approached the court again on the same issue, without disclosing the earlier litigation. Respondent No. 6, through counsel Anil Kumar Shukla, objected to the maintainability of the petition, arguing that such concealment amounted to forum abuse.

Court agreed, remarking that both petitions were filed by the same advocate and involved identical parties and property. “Non-disclosure of the previously filed writ petition and its result amounts to misuse of process of law,” the court said.

Citing several landmark Supreme Court judgments on the importance of truth in the judicial process, including Dalip Singh v. State of U.P., where the apex court had warned against the rise of litigants who resort to misrepresentation and falsehood, the high court said, "The soul derived from the judgments referred to above speaks that one of the two cherished basic values by Indian society for centuries is "satya" (truth) and the same has been put under the carpet. Truth constituted an integral part of the justice-delivery system in the pre- Independence era, however, the materialism has overshadowed the old ethos and the quest for personal gain has become so intense that those involved in litigation do not hesitate in taking shelter of falsehood, misrepresentation and suppression of facts in the court proceedings".

It emphasised that it is well settled that a litigant, who attempts to pollute the stream of justice or who touches the pure fountain of justice with tainted hands, is not entitled to any relief, interim or final. Suppression of material facts from the court of law, is actually playing fraud with the court. 

Justice Shailendra further quoted from K.D. Sharma v. Steel Authority of India Ltd., observing that no litigant is permitted to play “hide and seek” with the court or suppress facts to gain advantage.

Court also took note of the petitioner describing himself as a social worker, without furnishing any evidence of social work. “The chain of events described above shows that somehow the petitioner wanted action against respondent No. 6 to settle his personal scores,” the judge observed.

Accordingly, court imposed a cost of Rs. 15,000, and directed that the amount be deposited with the Registrar General within two weeks.

If the petitioner fails to pay, the District Collector of Hathras is to initiate coercive recovery. The amount is to be credited to Tara Sansthan and used exclusively for the welfare of residents at the Rabindra Nath Gaur Anand Old Age Home in Prayagraj. The head of the Sansthan is required to file statements detailing the use of the amount, with accountability to the Registrar General.

Case Title: Manish Kumar vs State of UP and 6 Others

Order Date: July 25, 2025

Bench: Justice Kshitij Shailendra