Madhya Pradesh High Court: In a petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking writ of Mandamus directing Respondent 4 to constitute a search team and conduct a fair and impartial inquiry in the petitioner’s “missing person” complaint regarding his wife and sons, a single-judge bench of Vishal Dhagat, J., held that the petitioner being fully aware of the facts surrounding his wife’s departure, filed this petition unnecessarily, causing undue trouble to the police and the judicial system and imposed a costs of ₹ 10,000/- on the petitioner for abusing the process of the Court.
The Court noted that the petitioner argued that the respondents failed to decide his representation and did not search for his wife and sons and as a result, he was compelled to file this petition before the Court. The Court noted that the police from Paraswada, District Balaghat (M.P.), had produced the petitioner’s wife and son before the Court.
The Court was informed by the petitioner’s wife that she had left the petitioner’s house in 2006 due to his merciless beatings of her and their sons. She further stated that the petitioner was fully aware of the reasons for her departure and had not lived with her husband for the last 18 years. The Court observed that the petitioner, knowing these facts, had filed the petition, thus abusing the process of the Court.
The Court ordered the petitioner to pay costs of ₹ 10,000/-, to be deposited with the Madhya Pradesh High Court Employees Association, Jabalpur (Union Bank of India, High Court Branch, SB A/c No. 519302010000235) within 30 days. The Court directed the Collector concerned to recover the cost by issuing a Revenue Recovery Certificate (RRC) if the amount was not deposited within the stipulated time. The Court dismissed the petition.
[Nandkishore Rahangdale v. State of M.P., 2024 SCC OnLine MP 5221, Decided on 07-08-2024]
Advocates who appeared in this case :
Shri Shambhoo Dayal Gupta, Counsel for the Petitioner
Shri Akshay Namdeo, Counsel for the State