The Delhi High Court has directed an inquiry into the alleged fabrication of a judicial order after finding that a copy relied upon before it contained an additional paragraph granting an “interim stay”, which was not part of the original order available in the Court record.
Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav was dealing with a petition concerning allegations of police inaction in a dispute relating to a property in Khera Khurd, Delhi.
During the proceedings, the petitioners relied upon an order purportedly passed by the High Court on November 19, 2024, in RSA 101/2024. The Court, however, upon examining the original judicial record, found a material discrepancy between the authentic order and the copy produced before it.
According to the original record, the order comprised three paragraphs. It recorded the submission of counsel seeking time to obtain instructions, adjourned the matter to January 14, 2025, and directed that the trial court record be requisitioned.
The copy placed before the High Court contained an additional fourth paragraph. The inserted paragraph purported to record the grant of an “interim stay”, thereby materially altering the effect of the original judicial order.
Taking note of the discrepancy, the Court observed that the circumstances indicated that someone had allegedly interfered with or fabricated the judicial record by introducing the additional paragraph. Given the nature of the allegation, the Court considered the matter to warrant investigation and appropriate action in accordance with law.
The High Court permitted the petitioners to submit a detailed representation to the Registrar General along with copies of both versions of the order so that the alleged discrepancy could be examined at the institutional level.
The petitioners were also granted liberty to approach the Commissioner of Police with a comprehensive representation. The Commissioner was directed to examine the allegations concerning the purported fabrication and take appropriate action in accordance with law within two months of receiving the representation.
The Court’s directions underscore the seriousness with which any unauthorised alteration of a judicial order is viewed, particularly where an inserted direction has the potential to confer substantive interim protection that was never granted by the Court.
The post Delhi High Court orders probe into alleged tampering of Judicial order, notes unauthorised addition of interim stay appeared first on India Legal.