Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: procured document in Dr. Jose Paul vs Union Of India (Uoi) on 26 March, 1993Matching Fragments
8. It was also contended that the conduct of the petitioner in obtaining prior information regarding the recommendation made by the Selection Committee and the rating given to his rivals respondents 3 and 4 in their CRs disentitle him from approaching this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. In my view the averment of the petitioner in the Petition on the aforesaid matters is not of such a nature to warrant dismissal of the Petition at the threshold itself. In MAGRAJ PATODIA v. R.K.BIRLA, the Supreme Court has ruled that the fact that a document was procured by improper or even 'illegal means' will not be a bar to its admissibility if it is relevant and its genuineness proved.