#Judicial Integrity

Supreme Court sets a binding precedent by annulling NCLT and NCLAT rulings based on AI-generated non-existent case law, emphasizing human oversight as non-negotiable in adjudication. The judgment mandates strict verification of all AI-assisted legal research to prevent judicial misconduct and uphold the sanctity of legal precedents.

The Bombay High Court dismissed a writ petition after finding the petitioner submitted a forged affidavit, verified by the notary’s register and sworn statement. The court invoked the clean hands doctrine, emphasizing that courts will not entertain litigants who deceive the judiciary - setting a clear precedent for accountability in constitutional litigation and deterring future misuse of judicial process.

The Bombay High Court has ruled that submitting a fabricated affidavit in a concluded petition to circumvent a judicial undertaking amounts to fraud on the court, triggering prosecution under CrPC 340. The Tehsildar responsible was penalized with a six-month salary deduction, setting a precedent for holding public officials accountable for undermining judicial orders through procedural deceit.

The Andhra Pradesh High Court has ruled that a certified copy of an FIR, already declared false by a criminal court, lacks evidentiary value and cannot be admitted in a civil suit under CPC Order VIII Rule 14(3), regardless of belated filing. This reinforces that judicial integrity trumps procedural leniency when documents are fundamentally unreliable, affecting litigants seeking to rely on tainted police records in property disputes.

The Madhya Pradesh High Court initiated suo motu criminal contempt proceedings against an individual who attempted to personally contact a judge regarding a pending writ petition, affirming that any unauthorized attempt to influence judicial decision-making undermines the core principle of impartial adjudication. This ruling reinforces that judicial integrity is non-negotiable-even private, non-public attempts to sway a judge constitute contempt under Section 2(c)(ii) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

The Bombay High Court imposed a Rs. 50,000 cost on a respondent for falsely representing in court that it would regularize tenancy under agreed terms, only to later submit a completely different leave and license agreement. This ruling reinforces that judicial trust cannot be weaponized through strategic misrepresentation, and sets a clear deterrent for parties attempting to manipulate settlement outcomes in civil proceedings.

Bombay High Court stays proceedings in a collusive suit and orders record sealing after allegations of fraud on the court, reinforcing the sanctity of judicial process.

Madhya Pradesh High Court dismisses writ petition for suppression of material facts, reaffirming that litigants must disclose all relevant proceedings to invoke constitutional jurisdiction.