Chandigarh

The High Court, in Antriksh vs. Manoj Kumar & Others, has taken up contempt proceedings against the respondents for allegedly producing and circulating a forged and fabricated court order. This case highlights the gravity of forging judicial documents and its impact on the administration of justice.

Background of the Case

The contempt petition was filed by the petitioner, represented by Mr. Ankit Chahal and Ms. Monika Beriwal, Advocates, against the respondents, alleging that they had willfully and deliberately created a fake order purporting to be issued by the High Court on 20.11.2024 in CWP No. 31164 of 2024. The petitioner claims that the original order, annexed as Annexure P-1, significantly differs from the allegedly forged document, marked as Annexure P-2.

The presence of Mr. Dinesh Arora, Advocate, representing respondent No.1, was noted in the court. Additionally, a fresh Vakalatnama was filed on behalf of the petitioner and duly accepted by the court.

Legal Issues Involved

1. Forgery and Fabrication of Judicial Documents – The act of creating and circulating a forged court order constitutes a serious offense under Sections 463, 465, 468, and 471 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
2. Contempt of Court – As per Article 215 of the Constitution of India, High Courts have the power to punish for contempt. Sections 10, 11, and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, provide the legal framework for penalizing those who interfere with the administration of justice.
3. Implications on Judicial Integrity – The case raises concerns over judicial authenticity and the necessity to safeguard official court orders from manipulation.

Possible Consequences

If the allegations are proven, the respondents may face both criminal prosecution for forgery and contempt proceedings, leading to:

• Imprisonment and Fines: Contempt under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act can result in up to six months imprisonment and/or a fine of Rs. 2,000.
• Criminal Liability under IPC: Forgery-related offenses may lead to imprisonment extending up to seven years under Section 468 IPC (Forgery for Purpose of Cheating).
• Disciplinary Actions: If any legal practitioners or officials are involved, professional misconduct proceedings may be initiated against them.

Significance of the Case

This case underscores the importance of maintaining judicial authenticity and preventing misuse of court orders. The decision of the High Court in the coming hearings will set a precedent for handling cases of forgery and contempt in judicial matters.

As the proceedings continue, legal experts and practitioners keenly observe the case’s developments, as it will reinforce the sanctity of the judicial system and deter future attempts to manipulate judicial records.

References:

• The Contempt of Courts Act, 1971
• The Constitution of India (Article 215)
• The Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Sections 463, 465, 468, 471)
• High Court of Chandigarh, COCP-4723-2024, Interim Order dated 01.03.2025