Read Time: 05 minutes

Synopsis

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has imposed a fine of ₹1 lakh on an 81-year-old man for filing numerous petitions against his daughter-in-law and judges handling his cases, describing his actions as a "cancer for the judicial system.”

Justice Sanjeev Kumar, presiding over the case, strongly criticised the language used by the petitioner in his plea against maintenance proceedings initiated by his daughter-in-law. The court noted that the petition contained numerous allegations that were utterly obnoxious and in extremely bad taste.“The petitioner is a person with a depraved mind and probably mentally sick,” the court remarked, highlighting the use of foul language used in the petition.

The court further said “The language used in the petition is demeaning of a woman and is totally unacceptable in any civilized society,” suggesting that the petitioner might require psychiatric help to prevent further abuse of the legal system.

The case involved a petition filed by the man under Article 226, seeking to quash the maintenance proceedings initiated by his daughter-in-law against his son. Despite holding a power of attorney from his son, the petitioner filed in his own name and included reckless allegations against the Sessions Judge overseeing the case.

The court observed that “The petitioner has no sense of decency and is not aware as to how the pleadings in the Court are required to be filed.” Additionally, the petitioner was identified as a habitual litigant, frequently filing petitions—some on behalf of his son to settle scores with his daughter-in-law, and others related to disputes with his former employer.

The court also pointed out that “In many cases which are pending or disposed of by this Court the petitioner has openly shown his lack of trust in almost every judge of this Court,” describing him as a significant nuisance, harassing judges at all levels.

The petition challenging the maintenance proceedings under Section 488 Cr. P.C., initiated by his daughter-in-law against his son, was deemed not maintainable by the petitioner, even if he held a power of attorney for his son.

Resultantly, the court declared the petition utterly misconceived, without merit, and aimed at harassing the Presiding Officer of the 4th Additional Sessions Court, Srinagar. Consequently, the petition was dismissed outright.

However, the court stated “the petitioner cannot be left to go scot-free as that would only encourage the petitioner to indulge in misadventures more vigorously aimed at harassing the Judicial Officers,” while imposing exemplary costs of ₹1,00,000 upon the petitioner. The cost was ordered to be deposited in the Litigants' Welfare Fund within four weeks.

 

Cause Title: Prof. Abdul Gani Bhat v Gowhar Majeed Dalal [WP(C) No. 1248/2024]