Punjab-Haryana High Court
Shashi Bala vs Joginder Singh And Another on 22 April, 2026
Author: Sudeepti Sharma
Bench: Sudeepti Sharma
COCP-3253-2023 (O&M) -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
107 COCP-3253-2023 (O&M)
Date of Decision: 22.04.2026
SHASHI BALA
......Petitioner
Vs.
JOGINDER SINGH AND ANOTHER
.....Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA
Present: Mr. Atul Lakhanpal, Sr. Advocate assisted by
Ms. Neha Lakhanpal, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Harish Nain, AAG, Haryana.
SUDEEPTI SHARMA J. (Oral)
1. The present contempt petition has been filed for deliberate and
intentional disobedience of Judgment passed by Hon’ble Apex Court in
Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar and another 2014 (8) SCR 128 and
judgment dated 31.07.2023 passed in Criminal Appeal No.2207 of 2023
arising out of SLP Criminal No.3433 of 2023 titled as Mohammad Asfaq
Alam Vs. The State of Jharkhand & Anr. and Notification No.159 Gaz.II
(17) dated 22.09.2023 of this Court.
2. Learned counsel for respondents contends that in compliance
of the same, affidavit of Mr. Joginder Singh, Inspector (Retd.), Former
S.H.O., P.S. Sadar Yamuna Nagar, dated 17.03.2026, along with the copy of
appointment letter issued by the accused Sohan Lal dated 07.06.2022,
attached as Annexure R-1; the copies of cheques issued by the accused
Sohan Lal dated 23.08.2023 and 05.04.2023, attached as Annexure R-2 and
Annexure R-3 and the copy of transcript of conversation from 11.02.2022 to
POONAM RANI
2026.04.27 19:54
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
COCP-3253-2023 (O&M) -2-
17.03.2022, attached as Annexure R-4, has been filed, which is reproduced
as under:-
“1- That petitioner has filed the present petition under
section 10 & 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1961
for the violation of directions of Hon’ble Apex Court
passed in “Arnesh Kumar V/s State of Bihar and
Another and judgment dated 31-07-2023 passed in
Criminal Case no.2207 of 2023 in SLP Criminal
No.3433 of 2023 titled as “Mohammad Asfaq Aalam
V/s State of Jharkhand and Another and Notification
No. 159 Gaz.II (17) dated 22-09-2023 of this Hon’ble
Court (Annexure P-11).
2- That earlier on 05-03-2024, the deponent had filed
reply to the present petition but on the previous date
of hearing i.e. 25-02-2026, the reply filed by the
deponent on behalf of the respondents was rejected
and directions were issued to file compliance
affidavit. Therefore, in compliance of above
mentioned order, the present affidavit is being filed.
3- That the instant petition is liable to be dismissed on
the ground of maintainability. The petitioner does not
entertain any kind of competence and locus standi to
file the present petition.
4- That the above said judgement of Hon’ble Supreme
Court is not applicable to the facts of the present case
as the offence committed by the accused persons
under section 467 IPC, the sentence is more than 10
years and is punishable for sentence for
imprisonment for life.
5- That the petitioner has not come to the court with
clean hands and has concealed the true and material
facts from the knowledge of this Hon’ble court. The
respondents have acted as per law in discharge of
POONAM RANI
2026.04.27 19:54
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
COCP-3253-2023 (O&M) -3-their official duty and there is no malice or mala fide
on the part of respondents. Therefore, the present
petition filed by the petitioner is not maintainable and
the same is liable to be dismissed.
6- That in this regard, it is submitted that a complaint
no.CM/OFF/J/2023/017174 dated 16-08-2023 moved
by the complainant against Sohan Lal and co-
accused Sunil Kumar was received in the police
station with the allegations of taking Rs.18,00,000/-
from the complainant by cheating and defrauding him
on the pretext of getting employment in railway and
giving false, forged and fabricated appointment letter
to him and threatening to kill the complainant. On the
basis of said written complaint the above mentioned
F.I.R. No.451 dt. 13-09-2023, U/s 406, 420, 467, 468,
471, 506, 120-B IPC was registered at Police Station
Sadar Yamunanagar. In this regard, the copy of F.L.R.
is already attached with the petition as Annexure P-
10.
7- That after the registration of case, the investigation
thereof was carried out and during the investigation,
the false, forged and fabricated appointment letter
issued by the accused Sohan Lal to the complainant,
the pen drive containing conversation between the
accused Sohan Lal and the complainant, two cheques
of Rs.2,00,000/- each, the statement of account
pertaining to the bank accounts of the complainant
and the accused were taken into the possession, the
statement of the witnesses were recorded.
8- That efforts were made to apprehend the accused
Sohan Lal and Sunil Kumar but in the meantime, the
accused Sohan Lal filed petition u/s 438 of Cr.P.C
seeking his anticipatory bail but the same was
POONAM RANI
2026.04.27 19:54
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
COCP-3253-2023 (O&M) -4-dismissed by the court of Ld. A.S.J., Jagadhri.
Thereafter, the accused Sohan Lal was arrested in the
preset case on 20-09-2023 and upon interrogation,
the accused Sohan Lal suffered his disclosure
statement and in pursuance of his disclosure
statement, the accused Sohan Lal got demarcated the
relevant places and also got recovered a mobile
phone and 20 currency note amounting to Rs.
10,000/-.
9- That thereafter on 21-09-2023 the accused Sunil
Kumar was arrested in the present case and upon
interrogation, the above said Sunil Kumar suffered
his disclosure statement and in pursuance of his
disclosure statement, the said Sunil Kumar got
demarcated the relevant places.
10- That it is pertinent to mention here that during
investigation, it has been found that the above said
accused Sohan Lal along with his co-accused Sunil
Kumar made misrepresentation and false promise to
get the complainant employment in railway
department and thereby managed to receive a sum of
Rs.18,10,600/- from the complainant by cheating and
defrauded. The accused also issued false, forged and
fabricated appointment letter to the complainant.
Thereafter, the accused Sohan Lal returned the
amount of Rs.1,89,400/- to the complainant and in
this regard, statement of bank account has been
collected during investigation. The co-accused also
issued two cheques of Rs.2,00,000/- each in the name
of father of the complainant but out of which one
cheque was dishonoured on presentation with the
bank. The accused Sohan Lal issued appointment
letter to the complainant. The copy of appointment
POONAM RANI
2026.04.27 19:54
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
COCP-3253-2023 (O&M) -5-letter issued by the accused Sohan Lal is attached
here for the kind perusal of this Hon’ble Court as
Annexure R-1. The copies of cheques issued by the
accused Sohan Lal are attached here with for the kind
perusal of this Hon’ble Court as Annexure R- 2 & R-
3 respectively.
11- That the name and role of the accused Sohan Lal and
his co-accused Sunil Kumar have been mentioned in
the F.I.R. itself. It has been revealed during
investigation, that the accused Sohan Lal and co-
accused Sunil Kumar made misrepresentation and
false promise to get the complainant employed in
railway department and thereby managed to receive a
sum Rs.18,10,600/- from the complainant by cheating
and defrauding. The accused Sohan Lal and co-
accused also prepared the false, forged and
fabricated appointment letter and issued the same to
the complainant. Thus, the accused Sohan Lal and
Sunil Kumar played active role in the commission of
offence and the accused Sohan Lal along with his co-
accused Sunil Kumar has committed the aforesaid
offence in a planned manner and in pursuance of
their criminal conspiracy.
12- That the respondents have not violated the directions
or orders passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of
India and this Hon’ble Court in any manner. Rather
the investigating agency has duly complied the
directions passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of
India and this Hon’ble Court and the above
mentioned accused were arrested by following the
due procedure of law. Thereafter, the accused
persons were produced before the Ld. Judicial
Magistrate 1st Class, Yamuna Nagar, District
POONAM RANI
2026.04.27 19:54
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
COCP-3253-2023 (O&M) -6-Yamuna Nagar and the Ld. JMIC verified the facts
of the case and reasons behind the arrest of the
accused persons in the present case. Thereupon, the
Ld. JMIC justifying the arrest of accused persons,
in the present case remanded the accused persons to
custody.
13- That in this way, the investigating agency has duly
complied the directions issued by the Hon’ble
Supreme Court of India in “Arnesh Kumar vs State
of Bihar and Another” as well as judgment dated
31-07-2023 passed in Criminal Case no.2207 of
2023 in SLP Criminal No.3433 of 2023 titled as
“Mohammad Asfaq Aalam V/s State of Jharkhand
and Another” and Notification No.159 Gaz. II (17)
dated 22-09-2023 of this Hon’ble Court (Annexure
P-11).
14- That during investigation sufficient evidence
connecting the above said accused Sohan Lal and
Sunil Kumar with the alleged offence has been
collected and it has been found that the above said
accused persons cheated and defrauded the
complainant and thereby received an amount of
Rs.18,10,600/- from the complainant prepared false,
forged and fabricated documents. Thus the above
said accused persons have committed the offence
punishable U/s 420, 467, 468, 471, 506, 120-B I.P.C.
in the present case, in a planned manner. It is also
pertinent to mention here that during the
investigation of present case, a pen drive containing
conversation between the complainant Deepak
Kumar, the accused Sunil Kumar and Ran Singh i.e.
father of the complainant Deepak Kumar has been
collected. The above said conversation itself is a
POONAM RANI
2026.04.27 19:54
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
COCP-3253-2023 (O&M) -7-sufficient proof of involvement of above said accused
in the present case. The copy of transcript of said
conversation is attached here with for the kind
perusal of this Hon’ble Court as Annexure R-4.
15- That it is also pertinent to mention here that the
accused of present case namely Sohan Lal and Sunil
Kumar are having criminal antecedents and beside
the present case one other criminal case ie. case
bearing F.I.R. No.239 Dated 03-07-2023 U/s 420,
467, 468, 471, 506, 120-B IPC has been registered
against the accused Sunil Kumar at P.S. Bilaspur,
Distt. Yamuna Nagar whereas one another case
bearing and F.I.R. No.667 Dated 01-10-2023 U/s
406, 420, 506 IPC has been registered against the
accused Sohan Lal at P.S. Shahbad, Distt.
Kurukshetra. It is also pertinent to mention here that
the above said Sunil Kumar and Sohan Lal have
glove hands with each other and in pursuance of
their criminal conspiracy, the above said Sunil
Kumar and Sohan Lal have usurped lacs of rupees
from the victim and now with a view to create a
defence and with a view to escape from the liability,
they are showing their fictitious dispute with other.
16- That the allegations leveled by the petitioner against
the police are totally false, baseless and beyond the
iota of any truth. In fact, the investigation of the
above mentioned case has been conducted in a free,
fair and impartial manner. It is also wrong that no
preliminary inquiry has been conducted before
registration of F.I.R. In fact, a complaint
no.CM/OFF/J/2023/017174 dated 16-08-2023
moved by the complainant against Sohan Lal and
co-accused Sunil Kumar was received in the police
POONAM RANI
2026.04.27 19:54
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
COCP-3253-2023 (O&M) -8-station and there upon preliminary inquiry was
made by the police and on finding the substance in
the allegations, the report thereof was submitted
before the higher officials and after verifying the
facts of the case, the Ld. D.S.P. (Head Quarter)
Yamuna Nagar further recommended the
registration of F.I.R. in the present case and
thereupon the Ld. Superintendent of Police,
Yamuna Nagar endorsed the registration of F.I.R.
and thereupon the present F.I.R. was registered.
17- That the contentions raised by way of present petition
are purely question of fact and cannot be decided in
the present petition at this stage and even from the
contentions raised by the petitioners, no ground for
initiating contempt proceedings against the
respondents is made out.
18- That thus, the above mentioned directions passed by
the Hon’ble Supreme Court and by this Hon’ble Court
has been duly complied with in the letter and spirit.”
3. A perusal of the same shows that FIR under Sections 406, 420,
467, 468, 471, 506 & 120-B IPC was registered against the husband of the
petitioner and a bare reading of the guidelines issued by Hon’ble Supreme
Court in Arnesh Kumar‘s case (supra) and the pleadings in the present
contempt petition shows that no contempt is made out. Still the petitioner
has filed the present contempt petition just to harass the respondents.
Despite having due knowledge of the legal position, the petitioner chose to
file present contempt proceedings and continued to pursue the same without
any justifiable or tenable grounds of law. Such conduct amounts to gross
abuse of the process of law and unnecessarily adds to the burgeoning
pendency of cases before this Court.
POONAM RANI
2026.04.27 19:54
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
COCP-3253-2023 (O&M) -9-
4. Normally when there is apparent contempt by the official
respondents, this Court imposes costs to be deducted from their salary for
non-compliance of the order. The present case is the set example of the
litigants, who are in the habit of blaming/targeting the official respondents
unnecessarily. A perusal of the file shows that there is no disobedience by
the respondents, rather, they are doing their duties effectively and efficiently.
5. It is well settled that contempt jurisdiction is required to be
exercised with great caution and circumspection and only in cases where
willful and intentional disobedience of an order of the Court is clearly made
out. The jurisdiction cannot be invoked to settle scores or to unnecessarily
harass officials, particularly when the record reflects compliance with the
directions issued by this Court.
6. Similar matter has already been dealt with by this Court in
COCP-3579-2025 decided on 24.07.2025 titled as “Payal Chaudhary V/s
KAP Sinha IAS and others”, while placing reliance on the judgments
passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court in case titled as “Dalip Singh V/s State
of Uttar Pradesh and others (2010) 2 SCC 114, Subrata Roy Sahara V/s
Union of India (2014) 8 SCC 470 and K.C. Tharakan V/s State Bank of
India & Ors. passed in Writ Petition (Civil) Diary No(s).27458/2022”. The
relevant paragraphs of Payal Chaudhary (supra) are reproduced as under:-
“9. It is evident that the petitioner has engaged in what
can only be described as a frivolous and vexatious
litigation spree, seemingly driven by a misplaced sense
of grievance. Such conduct constitutes a gross abuse of
the judicial process and contributes significantly to the
burgeoning pendency of cases before this Court. The
tendency of litigants to misuse the judicial forum by
POONAM RANI
2026.04.27 19:54
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
COCP-3253-2023 (O&M) -10-engaging in forum shopping, filing repetitive and
meritless petitions, and adopting dilatory tactics
undermines the very foundation of our legal system and
clogs the administration of justice.
10. The Hon’ble Supreme Court, in Dalip Singh Vs.
State of Uttar Pradesh and others (2010) 2 SCC 114,
has cautioned against this emerging category of
unscrupulous litigants who, devoid of respect for truth,
resort to falsehood and unethical practices in their
pursuit of relief. The Supreme Court emphatically held
that such litigants, who seek to pollute the stream of
justice or who dare to touch the fountain of justice with
unclean hands, are not entitled to any relief, interim or
final. Relevant extracts of the same is reproduce as
under:-
“In the last 40 years, a new creed of litigants has
cropped up. Those who belong to this creed do not
have any respect for truth. They shamelessly resort
to falsehood and unethical means for achieving
their goals. Courts have evolved new principles to
curb such abuse, and it is now well established
that a litigant who attempts to pollute the stream
of justice or touches the pure fountain of justice
with tainted hands is not entitled to any relief,
interim or final.”
11. The petitioner’s conduct in instituting frivolous
litigation has resulted in a gross misuse of the judicial
process, thereby squandering the valuable time and
resources of this Court. It is imperative, in the interest of
justice, that bona fide and timely claims are adjudicated
expeditiously, without being impeded by vexatious and
unscrupulous litigation. At this juncture, reference may
be made to the pertinent observations of the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in Subrata Roy Sahara v. Union of
India (2014) 8 SCC 470, wherein the Court lamented the
pervasive malaise of frivolous litigation afflicting the
POONAM RANI
2026.04.27 19:54
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
COCP-3253-2023 (O&M) -11-
Indian judicial system. The Hon’ble Apex Court
observed as under:-
“The Indian judicial system is grossly afflicted
with frivolous litigation. Ways and means need to
be evolved, to deter litigants from their compulsive
obsession towards senseless and illconsidered
claims. One needs to keep in mind, that in the
process of litigation, there is an innocent sufferer
on the other side of every irresponsible and
senseless claim. He suffers long drawn anxious
periods of nervousness and restlessness, whilst the
litigation is pending, without any fault on his
part.”
12. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has consistently
emphasized the need to deter frivolous appeals and
petitions by imposing exemplary costs on the litigating
parties. In Writ Petition (Civil) Diary No(s). 27458/2022
titled as K.C. Tharakan v. State Bank of India & Ors.
decided on 01.05.2023, the Hon’ble Apex Court held as
follows:
“No legal system can permit a situation wherein a
party repeatedly agitates the same issue after it
has been conclusively adjudicated by the highest
judicial forum. Such conduct amounts to a gross
misuse of the judicial process and results in a
significant waste of valuable judicial time.
Accordingly, the present writ petition is dismissed
with costs. However, taking into consideration that
the petitioner is a dismissed employee, we deem it
appropriate to impose a nominal cost. The writ
petition is, therefore, dismissed with costs
quantified at ₹10,000/-, to be deposited with the
Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Welfare
Fund, to be utilized for the benefit of the SCBA
Library.”
7. In view of the above referred to judgments, this Court is firmly
of the opinion that the instant petition constitutes a glaring instance of
misuse of the judicial process. It is, therefore, incumbent upon this Court to
safeguard the sanctity of judicial proceedings and to prevent their
POONAM RANI
2026.04.27 19:54
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
COCP-3253-2023 (O&M) -12-
exploitation by unscrupulous litigants. The time and resources of this Court
are limited and must be reserved for bona fide grievances that merit judicial
consideration.
8. The aforesaid judgments clearly emphasize that frivolous and
vexatious litigation must be curbed with a firm hand. The repeated filing of
meritless petitions not only results in wastage of precious judicial time but
also causes unnecessary harassment to public officials, who are constrained
to defend themselves despite having acted in accordance with law.
9. Therefore, in the considered opinion of this Court, the time has
come when not only deterrent costs must be imposed upon the official
respondents but also upon the frivolous litigants. If, in cases of genuine
disobedience, costs can be imposed upon officials and recovered from their
salaries, there is no reason why, in cases of manifest abuse of process such
as the present one, the erring petitioner should not be saddled with
exemplary costs payable to the affected officials.
10. Accordingly, with a view to send a strong deterrent message
and to preserve the sanctity of judicial proceedings, this Court deems it
appropriate to impose costs of `1,00,000/- upon the petitioner, to be
disbursed to the respondents, in equal shares.
11. The said amount shall be deposited with the respondents in their
bank accounts.
12. Consequently, the present contempt petition is dismissed with
costs of `1,00,000/- (` One Lakh Only), to be disbursed to the respondents,
in equal shares i.e., `50,000/- each. The respondents are directed to provide
their bank account details to the petitioner.
POONAM RANI
2026.04.27 19:54
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
COCP-3253-2023 (O&M) -13-
13. In the event of default in compliance, the amount shall be
recovered from the petitioner as arrears of land revenue by the competent
authority.
14. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, are also disposed of.
22.04.2026 (SUDEEPTI SHARMA)
P. Seth JUDGE
Whether speaking/non-speaking : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
POONAM RANI
2026.04.27 19:54
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document