NEW DELHI: As the mystery surrounding the 'ghost litigant' in Supreme Court refuses to die down with all the lawyers involved in the case shrugging off their involvement, the court on Tuesday ordered an inquiry into the controversy by the Bar Council of India and said that it would consider a police investigation after getting BCI's report.
A bench of Justices P S Narasimha and Atul S Chandurkar granted eight weeks to BCI to look into the controversy and file a report. The bench accepted the plea of Supreme Court Advocates On Record Association president Vipin Nair who submitted that BCI should first hold an inquiry on the alleged role of lawyers and thereafter police could be roped in for further investigation if some outsider was involved.
In this murky case, a litigant managed to get a favourable order from the SC after a 'ghost' opponent propped up in court proceedings who told the court that he had compromised with the petitioner in a land dispute, which became the basis for the top court to quash orders passed by a Muzaffarpur trial court and Patna HC against the litigant.
Five months later, the real opponent appeared and told the court that he had neither compromised with the petitioner nor engaged any lawyer to represent him before the SC. Both the parties are blaming each other for playing with the court and, interestingly, both of them pressed for police investigation.
The SC has already recalled its order which was passed on the basis of the alleged fake compromise.
A bench of Justices P S Narasimha and Atul S Chandurkar granted eight weeks to BCI to look into the controversy and file a report. The bench accepted the plea of Supreme Court Advocates On Record Association president Vipin Nair who submitted that BCI should first hold an inquiry on the alleged role of lawyers and thereafter police could be roped in for further investigation if some outsider was involved.
In this murky case, a litigant managed to get a favourable order from the SC after a 'ghost' opponent propped up in court proceedings who told the court that he had compromised with the petitioner in a land dispute, which became the basis for the top court to quash orders passed by a Muzaffarpur trial court and Patna HC against the litigant.
Five months later, the real opponent appeared and told the court that he had neither compromised with the petitioner nor engaged any lawyer to represent him before the SC. Both the parties are blaming each other for playing with the court and, interestingly, both of them pressed for police investigation.
The SC has already recalled its order which was passed on the basis of the alleged fake compromise.
You may also like
Child murderer's five last words after injection on death row amid defibrillator row
Bombay HC: 'Larger Flat Owners Must Pay Higher Maintenance In Condominiums Under 1970 Act'
Kremlin issues crude warning to Trump over nuclear rhetoric amid 'head-on collision' fears
Mumbai News: BMC Backs Adani's Bandra Reclamation Project, Says Plot Outside CRZ; Petitioner Alleges MSRDC Suppressed Facts
Hulk Hogan's loved ones 'gather for funeral service' as tribute to WWE star spotted
