Punjab-Haryana High Court
V.P.S.Thakur @ Varinder vs The Lokayukta on 5 October, 2012
Author: Surya Kant
Bench: Surya Kant
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
Letters Patent Appeal No.1571 of 2012(O&M)
Date of Decision : October 05, 2012
V.P.S.Thakur @ Varinder .....Appellant
versus
The Lokayukta, Haryana and others .....Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT.
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.P.NAGRATH.
Present : Mr.Amit Jaiswal, Advocate, for the appellant.
-.-
1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the
judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?
---
Surya Kant, J. (Oral)
CM No.4149 of 2012 For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed subject to all just exceptions and 22 days' delay in filing the appeal is condoned.
CM stands disposed of.
LPA No.1571 of 2012 (O&M) This Letters Patent Appeal is directed against the order dated 20.7.2012 passed by learned Single Judge dismissing Civil Writ Petition No.14547 of 2011 wherein the appellant challenged an order dated 18.5.2011 of the Lokayukta, Haryana, directing his prosecution for making false complaint and wasting time of the Lokayukta in prosecuting a totally baseless complaint alleging inaction on the part of the police authorities of Ambala. The appellant's prosecution has been directed by the Lokayukta in exercise of his power under Section 16 of the Haryana Lokayukta Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').
Learned Single Judge while upholding the afore-stated order has observed that the appellant's complaint before the Lokayukta was LPA No.1571 of 2012 (O&M) [2] totally vexatious and so was his writ petition challenging the order of the Lokayukta. Consequently, the appellant has been burdened with cost of Rs.20,000/- to be deposited with the Haryana State Legal Services Authority.
The aggrieved appellant has preferred this appeal. Learned counsel for the appellant instead of pressing the appeal on merits, submits at the outset that the appellant is repentant on his conduct and is willing to tender unconditional apology before the Lokayukta for the latter's sympathetic re-consideration of the order dated 18.5.2011 to the extent it directs the appellant's prosecution under Section 16 of the Act.
Having heard learned counsel for the appellant though we find no legal infirmity in the order under appeal, however, deem it appropriate to observe that subject to the appellant's tendering unconditional apology and showing bonafide realization of the misconduct he committed through malicious prosecution of the police authorities or some private individuals, the learned Lokayukta may sympathetically consider the appellant's prayer to modify/recall the order dated 18.5.2011 to the extent of his prosecution under Section 16 of the Act. We, however, refuse to interfere with the order passed by learned Single Judge imposing cost of Rs.20,000/-. The appellant will produce the receipt of deposit of the cost amount alongwith the application to be moved before the Lokayukta, Haryana.
The appeal stands disposed of accordingly.
(SURYA KANT)
JUDGE
October 05, 2012 (R.P.NAGRATH)
Mohinder JUDGE