Stop the Fudge, says the Judge

• A person denied bail forges a High Court order showing that bail was granted to another person in the same case. And then files an appeal.

Story continues below this ad

• Three lawyers gang up to file a bail application in the name of a ‘‘non-existent’’ lawyer.

AT least 70 such examples of fraud have come to light in the Patna High Court blowing the lid off the first such scam in the country’s higher judiciary. A scam involving members of the Bar working allegedly with court staff, to pull the wool over the judges’ eyes. Across Bihar, in Patna, and several towns including Begusarai, Bhojpur, Bhagalpur, Jehanabad, Gopalganj, Muzaffarpur and Nalanda.

Ironically, in a state, which was the first in the country to try out an e-court—using videoconferencing and computer records—to make justice more efficient and transparent.

This fraud, however, shakes the very faith of the court, said Chief Justice R S Dhavan who, in an unprecedented order on October 22, first reported by The Indian Express, revealed that the Registrar General had reported ‘‘collusion between the litigants, the lawyers, the lawyers’ clerks and the staff of the High Court.’’

Justice Dhavan flew in to New Delhi on Friday and is said to have discussed the matter with Chief Justice B N Kirpal the same evening.

Speaking to The Sunday Express, amicus curae in the matter, Vibhuti Prasad Pandey said: ‘‘The registry is searching and the search is also going on in various districts and sessions courts. The likelihood is that the number will increase further.’’

The report of Registrar General Sachinandan Mukerjee, a copy of which has been obtained by The Sunday Express, lists around 70 cases of ‘‘perjured records.’’ These include suppression of facts, cooking up false lawyers and fudging orders in bail matters, writ petitions and appeals.

According to the report, the fraud ranges from submitting bail petitions after they had already been rejected, failing to inform the court that the bail application had already been rejected. And, in some cases, deleting the name of the accused from the FIR while submitting the application.

Incidentally, it was Justice Dhavan who was the first to scent the scam when on an appeal in a tax matter, he found that a judge’s name had been erased from an order to pass it off as a single judge’s decision—and hence qualify for appeal.

Usually, whenever such instances of fraud have been detected, they have been dismissed as isolated cases. Justice Dhavan, however, saw this as a symptom of the rot and ordered a probe—which is when the dirt flew.

Now the Vigilance Department, the CBI and the High Court are all investigating these cases.

Some action has already been taken as the probe goes on: z 26 forgery cases have been filed in the court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate—six of these are against lawyers.

•Showcause notices in 14 cases by the court against advocates, their clerks and petitioners. • CBI chargesheet in 11 cases on charges of fabricating false evidence in judicial proceedings. In four cases, charges dropped due to lack of evidence.

• 14 cases of forgery in district and sessions courts across the state. z State Vigilance is probing three cases against four advocates and two clerks.

• Seven lawyers let off by the High Court after a ‘‘warning.’’