| HC slaps Rs 2 lakh costs on 'habitual litigant', flags repeated vexatious petitions | | | Early Times Report
JAMMU, Dec 8: The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has dismissed a petition filed through attorney Abdul Gani Bhat and imposed exemplary costs of ?2 lakh on him, holding that he has repeatedly abused the judicial process by filing frivolous and vexatious cases against judges and court officials.
Justice Vinod Chatterji Koul, while deciding CRM(M) No. 660/2025, observed that Abdul Gani Bhat has emerged as a "habitual litigator" who spends most of his time in courts by filing baseless petitions, thereby harassing judicial officers and wasting valuable court time. The order notes that earlier, a coordinate bench had imposed ?1 lakh costs on him in a similar matter and made strong observations about his conduct.
The petition, filed under Section 528 BNSS on behalf of Dr. Mohammad Himayun, sought directions including the framing of a complaint against the petitioner's daughter-in-law (respondent no. 1), initiation of contempt proceedings against trial court judges, and other related reliefs. The court recorded that the attorney holder levelled "serious, indecent, and wild allegations" against his own daughter-in-law and subordinate judges, and ordered objectionable remarks to be struck off from the pleadings.
The High Court further pointed out that Bhat had earlier filed similar petitions on the same cause of action, including CRM(M) No. 427/2024 (dismissed for non-prosecution on April 8, 2025) and CRM(M) No. 450/2025 (dismissed on August 20, 2025), besides an Article 226 petition that was dismissed with ?1 lakh costs to be deposited in the Litigants' Welfare Fund.
Questioning his locus and authority to argue as a legal practitioner, the court noted that the attorney holder failed to show how his authorization entitled him to represent and argue under the Advocates Act. The order underlines that repeated attempts to re-agitate settled issues and level reckless allegations against presiding officers amount to a direct assault on judicial efficiency and public confidence in the justice delivery system.
Directing strict recovery, the court ordered that the ?2 lakh costs be recovered within four weeks. The Registrar Judicial has been asked to initiate recovery proceedings and, in case of default, recover the amount as land revenue. A copy of the order will also be placed before the Chief Justice for consideration of rules or guidelines to regulate and control vexatious petitions.
—(JNF) |
|
