(Jagdish Singh Khehar, C.J. and D.Y. Chandrachud and Sanjay Kishan Kaul, JJ.)
Rashid Ali Saudagar ________________________________ Petitioner
v.
Justice Madan B. Lokur & Ors. _____________________ Respondent(s)
Criminal Miscellenous Petition No. 486/2017 in Criminal Miscellenous Petition No./2016 in Writ Petition (Crl.) No. of 2017 (Diary No. 757/2016), decided on March 27, 2017
The Order of the court was delivered by
Order
1. The petitioner, who appears in person, is not possessed of any application or previous proceedings. When called upon to demonstrate the outcome of earlier proceeding, he merely states, that since the said proceedings are not listed today, there as no occasion for him to have the said paper work with him.
2. Having perused the appeal preferred by the applicant against the Registrar’s order dated 3.10.2016, we are satisfied, that it was imperative for the applicant to demonstrate on merits his agitation against the Registrar’s order dated 3.10.2016. In the pleadings no filed by the applicant, which have been declined to be entertained by the Registrar of this Court, the applicant has impleaded by name two Hon’ble sitting Judges of this Court. These Hon’ble Judges have nothing to do with the merits of the controversy, i.e., the order of the Registrar dated 3.10.2016. In fact, the prayer made in the application, which was sought to be lodged (and not entertained) by the Registrar in his order dated 3.10.2016, is for an appropriate writ, order or direction, requiring imposition of criminal sanctions against the Hon’ble Judges for “usurpation, tyranny, subversion of the Constitution, abuse of power, seditious conspiracy, judicial misconduct and malfeasance in office”. It is also the prayer of the applicant, that an appropriate writ, order or direction be issued, restraining the two Hon’ble Judges from performing any constitutional function and for preventing them from exercising any constitutional authority, “on account of their having defaulted in their constitutional obligations, and on account of having broken their oath of office”.
3. We are of the considered view, that the Registrar was fully justified in lodging the petition filed by the applicant, vide his order dated 3.10.2016. We therefore, hereby dismiss the appeal preferred by the applicant against the order of the Registrar.
4. We are, however, perturbed about the manner in which the applicant has repeatedly approached this Court and made an effort to raise the same issue again and again. He also casts serious aspersions on two Hon’ble sitting Judges, without any basis or justification. Even though, we could have passed an order of greater rigour as would, be a deterrent for similar behaviour at the hands of others, for the moment, we are satisfied in dismissing the instant application/appeal with costs. Needless to mention, that similar behaviour in future would be dealt with, keeping institutional reputation in mind. We therefore hereby, dismiss the instant appeal against the Registrar’s order dated 3.10.2016, with costs quantified at Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only). The aforesaid costs shall be deposited by the applicant/appellant in the Registry of this Court, which shall be transmitted to the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee, within four weeks from today. In case the costs are not deposited within the aforesaid time, the Registry shall list this case for hearing in open Court, for the recovery of the above costs.
5. The applicant/appellant is restrained from approaching this Court or any other Court on the issue(s), which have been disposed of by this Court, hitherto before.
CRL.M.P. NO. 486/2017 IN CRL.MP.NO……../2016 in Writ Petition (Criminal) No…………./2017 (D.No. 757/2016)
Rashid Ali Saudagar _________________________________ Petitioner
v.
Justice Madan B. Lokur & Ors ______________________ Respondent(s)
Date: 27/03/2017 This matter was called on for hearing today.
(Before Jagdish Singh Khehar, C.J. and D.Y. Chandrachud and Sanjay Kishan Kaul, JJ.)
For Petitioner(s) In-person
For Respondent(s)
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the folloing
Order
6. The application/appeal against the Registrar’s order is dismissed with costs quantified at Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only), in terms of the signed order.
———
