Bringing Miscarried Foetus To Court To Evoke Sympathy 'Highly Improper': MP High Court Warns Litigant

The Madhya Pradesh High Court, on Thursday (March 11), dismissed the petition of a man who placed a foetus in front of the court dias to evoke sympathy of the court, observing that such conduct was objectionable, improper and lowers the dignity and decorum of the court. The bench of Justice Himanshu Joshi observed, "The petitioner had placed a fetus in front of the Court dais during the proceedings apparently with a view to evoke sympathy of the Court. Such an act is highly objectionable, improper and amounts to lowering the dignity and decorum of the Court. Court proceedings cannot be converted into a platform for emotional display or for attempting to secure undue sympathy". According to the petitioner, he had exposed embezzlement and theft amounting to more than Rs. 200 crore by Maruti Suzuki Ltd. The petitioner claimed that, due to the discovery, he and his family were harassed on several occasions. He further claimed that despite submitting representations before the President of India and other Central and State Government authorities, no action was being taken. He further alleged that he and his wife were attacked by a car, causing his wife to have a miscarriage. The petitioner brought the said foetus and placed it before the court dias, praying for the relief of euthanasia. However, he later altered his plea and sought damages and compensation for the alleged immense physical, emotional, and financial hardship faced by his family. The court noted that the petitioner had earlier filed two writ petitions in connection with the aforementioned accidents, but later withdrew them with liberty to file before the appropriate forums. Further, it was observed that the petition was vague and bereft of any material particulars. The bench observed that the petitioner had levelled serious allegations, including embezzlement and attacks on his family members, but failed to produce any cogent evidence to show the same. "The manner in which sweeping allegations have been made against various authorities and a private company, without any cogent material, clearly indicates that the petition lacks bona fides", the bench held. The bench further noted that the petitioner had altered his stand before the court from seeking relief of euthanasia to seeking compensation and damages for the physical and mental hardships. However, the bench noted that the petition appeared to be vexatious and speculative litigation. The bench held, "Such shifting stands and repeated invocation of the writ jurisdiction of this Court, without placing any cogent supporting evidence or material on record, clearly indicates that the petitioner is indulging in vexatious and speculative litigation. The conduct of the petitioner thus reflects that he is a litigious person attempting to repeatedly agitate the same issue before this Court without pursuing the remedies as earlier directed". The court also noted that the petitioner failed to exhaust his remedy under Section 175(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, which empowers a magistrate to order an investigation and direct registration of an FIR.Before concluding the matter, the court took a serious note of the petitioner's conduct of bringing and placing the foetus in front of the court dias. The court noted that such conduct of the petitioner was an attempt to convert court proceedings into a platform for emotional display intended to evoke the sympathy of the court. The bench held, "The Court is the same for every litigant and the grief or suffering of one party cannot be weighed against that of another to influence the judicial process. Justice is administered strictly in accordance with law and on the basis of legally admissible material placed on record, and not on emotional considerations or theatrical conduct in the Courtroom". It added, "A fetus, being human anatomical material, is required to be handled and disposed of strictly in accordance with the provisions of the Biomedical Waste Management Rules, 2016. Unauthorized carrying and display of such remains in a public place like a Courtroom not only violates the prescribed procedure but also prima facie amounts to offering indignity to a human corpse punishable under the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. Such conduct is also capable of disturbing the decorum and dignity of the Court."Thus, the court dismissed the petition and advised the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum by filing an application before the concerned jurisdictional Magistrate in accordance with law, including by invoking the remedy available under Section 175(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.Case Title: Dayashankar Pandey v His Excellency, the President of India [WP-6020-2026]For State: Deputy Advocate General Vivek Sharma with Government Advocate Priyanka Mishra For Maruti Suzuki: Senior Advocate Manoj Sharma with Advocate Lavanya VermaClick here to read/download the Order

Bringing Miscarried Foetus To Court To Evoke Sympathy 'Highly Improper': MP High Court Warns Litigant

Jayanti Pahwa

Tags