Rajasthan High Court: In a writ petition filed by husband-petitioner seeking directions to the University of Rajasthan to take action against his wife for alleged plagiarism committed by her in her research thesis, a single-judge bench of Anoop Kumar Dhand, J., dismissed the petition for being “highly misconceived” and an attempt to misuse the Court to “settle the personal grudges or disputes.”
In the instant matter, the complaint of plagiarism was originally submitted by the petitioner to the University, following which the Vice Chancellor, on 24-08-2023, constituted a committee to examine the matter. However, aggrieved by the delay in action despite the passage of a considerable time since the committee’s formation, the petitioner approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of mandamus against the university authorities.
The Court opined that “the platform of this Court cannot be used to settle personal scores between the parties.” The Court noted that once the complaint was submitted and a committee was formed, the petitioner had no further role to play. The Court stated that the respondents were expected to proceed in accordance with law, and judicial intervention at this stage was unwarranted.
The Court further remarked that “now, with an oblique motive to settle his personal score, the petitioner has submitted this writ petition. Such act of the petitioner is sheer abuse of the process of law.”
The Court cited Gurpal Singh v. State of Punjab, (2005) 5 SCC 136; Subrata Roy Sahara v. Union of India, (2014) 8 SCC 470 and Chanchalpati Das v. State of W.B., 2023 SCC Online SC 650 and reinforced the proposition that frivolous litigation and misuse of judicial process for settling personal vendettas should be discouraged.
The Court found that the writ petition was filed with an ulterior motive and amounted to a blatant misuse of the process of law. The Court firmly held that “platform of this Court cannot be used to settle the personal grudges or disputes.” Consequently, the Court dismissed the writ petition as “highly misconceived” and also dismissed all pending applications, if any.
[Gaurav Sharma v. University of Rajasthan, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6664/2025, Decided on 05-05-2025]
Advocates who appeared in this case :
Mr. Shobit Tiwari, Counsel for the Petitioner
Buy Constitution of India HERE
