New Delhi, Oct 10 (IANS) Observing that the filing of frivolous cases has a far-reaching and detrimental impact on the legal system, the Delhi High Court has asked the prosecution and legal departments of the national capital to exercise due diligence before initiating cases.
A bench of Justice Amit Mahajan was hearing a plea seeking a grant of leave to appeal against a 2019 judgment passed by the Special Fast Track Court acquitted the respondents in relation to an FIR registered under Sections 376/511 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860.
As per the prosecutrix, her mother worked as a maid in several houses, and the landlord’s son attempted to commit rape upon her and fled when an alarm was raised.
The trial court framed charges under Sections 341, 323, 354, 376, and 511 of the IPC against the main accused and separate charges under Sections 341, 323 and 34 of the IPC were framed against the mother and sister of the accused.
In her cross-examination, the prosecutrix deposed that the dispute took place between her family and the family of the accused in regard to vacating the premises. Further, she replied that a false complaint was filed against the accused persons, in response to a query put forward by the trial court.
The trial court noted that the “real dispute between the parties was with regard to the rent” and the complainant had stated that the accused had not attempted to rape her.
Also, the DD entry pursuant to a PCR call, only mentions that there was a quarrel and no allegation of an attempt to rape was ever made.
Considering the affidavits filed by the prosecutrix and her mother, where they had deposed that the dispute was in regard to the rent and a false complaint was filed, the trial court acquitted the accused respondents.
Questioning the filing of a prosecution appeal, the Delhi High Court said that it was “unable to understand the reasoning behind the Department of Law & Legislative Affairs recommending an appeal in this case”.
It said: “It is trite law that this court must exercise caution and should only interfere in an appeal against acquittal where there are substantial and compelling reasons to do so. [I]t is trite law that the accused can be convicted solely on the basis of evidence of the complainant/victim as long as the same inspires confidence and corroboration is not necessary for the same.”
The Delhi HC noted that the Additional Public Prosecutor, in the proceedings before the Rohini Courts, initially opined that the case was not suitable for appeal to the High Court.
It further noted: “The Director of Prosecution also shared this view, concluding that the case did not warrant an appeal to the High Court. However, it appears that the Department of Law & Legislative Affairs later proposed filing an appeal.”
In its order, the Delhi HC said that “although the present case clearly qualifies as one where costs should be imposed on the prosecution for filing a frivolous appeal,” but has chosen to refrain from passing such an order with a direction to the Department of Law & Legislative Affairs to exercise greater vigilance and sensitivity in deciding which cases to prosecute.
“The filing of frivolous cases has a spiral effect on other litigations which are waiting for their turn to be heard before the Courts. The misuse of the legal process through frivolous litigation wastes judicial time and resources, and the Department must ensure that only meritorious cases are brought before the Court, avoiding unnecessary burden on the judicial system,” it added.
Dismissing the plea, the Delhi HC said that it is imperative that the prosecution and legal departments exercise due diligence before initiating cases, in order to preserve the integrity of the judicial process and ensure timely justice for those with legitimate grievances.
