Delhi High Court: In the present case, a petition was filed by the petitioner-NGO seeking directions to the respondents to demolish the illegal and unauthorized construction at one property. However, Mr. F, the person who had filed the petition, was not authorized. A Single Bench of Mini Pushkarna, J., imposed a cost of Rs 50,000 upon him for gross malpractice and directed the Deputy Commissioner of Police (‘DCP’) to investigate the matter.
The president of the NGO contended that he had not authorized anyone to file the present petition. He placed on record a copy of the public notice, published in Indian Express (English Newspaper) and Jan Satta (Hindi Newspaper), which stated that the letter head of the NGO was stolen, and used unauthorizedly by Mr. F. He also produced a copy of a complaint regarding the same.
After considering that the affidavit was deposed by Mr. F, the Court stated that it was a very serious matter, and a case of deception and fraud being played upon this Court. The Court opined that “when an unauthorized person files a petition of this nature for taking action against unauthorized construction, the said conduct is not only deceitful, but also misuse and abuse of the process of law.”
Further, the Court stated that it discharges a very critical function of dispensing justice when citizens and other bodies approach it seeking relief when they are aggrieved by various actions of private individuals or statutory bodies and which is why when such solemn process of the court is misused by parties for their personal, unlawful gains and with ulterior and covert motives, the Courts have to come down heavily on such unscrupulous persons.
Thus, the Court directed the DCP, Central District, to investigate the matter, and take appropriate action against Mr. F. The Court stated that such gross misdeed and malpractice could not be condoned or let off in a light manner and imposed a cost of Rs 50,000 on Mr. F. The Court specified that it would be payable to Delhi High Court Bar Clerk Association, within six weeks.
Further, disposing of the petition, the Court emphasized that in case of non-compliance in deposing the said amount within the said time frame, the matter would be listed before the Registrar of this Court for compliance.
[Delhi ki Galiyan NGO v. Deputy Commr., W.P.(C) No. 10595 of 2024, decided on 13-10-2025]
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner: Akbar Ali, President
For the Respondents: Shabbir Ali, Adv., Kushagra Kumar, Adv., SI Nitin, PS Jamia Nagar, Rachita Garg and Agam Rajput, Advs., Saurabh Goel, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Hirein Sharma