On Monday, the Supreme Court raised concerns over a growing trend of petitions and pleadings, particularly in family law cases, containing implausible and exaggerated claims [K Vadivel v K Shanthi and ors].
A bench consisting of Justices BR Gavai and KV Viswanathan emphasized that such cases not only contribute to the backlog of pending cases but also delay the resolution of more deserving matters. The court underscored that applications lacking merit should not be filed in the first place.
“Recently, we have observed a disturbing trend where pleadings and petitions make outlandish and obviously unbelievable statements, especially in certain family law proceedings, both civil and criminal. Upon reading some of these submissions, we wonder if the individuals were even aware of what was filed on their behalf before they signed. These frivolous filings undermine the rule of law by adding to the case backlog and delaying justice for others,” the bench noted.
The court stressed that frivolous and vexatious cases should be discouraged through punitive measures, such as imposing exemplary costs, to deter litigants from using such tactics. It further highlighted that both litigants and society expect timely justice.
“It is well-established that speedy justice is a critical aspect of the rule of law. Delaying justice can severely harm the legal system. Even when parties themselves attempt to delay proceedings without valid cause, courts must act promptly to prevent such tactics. The public’s faith in the judiciary must not be shaken, and courts must ensure that justice is delivered swiftly,” the court added.
These remarks were made while overturning a Madurai Bench ruling from the Madras High Court that called for further investigation into a murder case, despite substantial progress already made in the trial. The Supreme Court observed that there were no valid reasons for reopening the investigation in this case, and that delays had occurred despite 11 years passing since the incident.
While the Supreme Court set aside the High Court’s order and directed the trial court to proceed without taking the additional chargesheet into consideration, it also instructed the trial court to deliver its judgment within eight weeks. The court refrained from imposing costs on the litigants, acknowledging that the High Court had permitted the further probe.
Senior Advocate Jayanth Muth Raj represented the accused, K Vadivel, while Senior Advocate S Nagamuthu appeared for the wife of the deceased. Senior Advocate Amit Anand Tiwari represented the State of Tamil Nadu.
