The Supreme Court has taken a stringent stance against a petitioner for failing to disclose pertinent information in a remission plea, signaling potential serious consequences. Justices Abhay S. Oka and A.G. Masih, expressing their dismay, noted that the petitioner had previously sought similar relief from the Delhi High Court without informing the apex court, leading to an inadvertent extension of her surrender date.
During the proceedings, Additional Solicitor General Rajkumar Bhaskar Thakare revealed that the Delhi High Court had issued two significant orders concerning the petitioner’s plea. The first order, dated October 16, 2024, granted the petitioner two weeks to surrender and allowed her to apply for parole—a fact unknown to the Supreme Court when it later extended her surrender period on October 21.
“The order dated October 16, 2024, was crucial and should have been disclosed to us. Had we known, the subsequent extension would not have been granted,” remarked the bench. The Delhi High Court further extended her surrender deadline to November 8, 2024, yet none of this was communicated to the Supreme Court, which led to the issuance of a notice for her to explain her conduct.
The Court’s notice, set for a return on December 16, 2024, hints at the possibility of actions under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, due to the suppression of facts by the petitioner. Additionally, the Court has directed the Delhi State Legal Services Authority to appoint a legal representative for the petitioner, who is currently incarcerated. This advocate is tasked with meeting the petitioner to fully understand her actions and the advice she received regarding the filing of multiple legal proceedings.
The appointed legal advocate must also file an affidavit detailing the petitioner’s conduct and the advice she acted upon. The Supreme Court further warned that if the petitioner fails to surrender by the stipulated date of November 30, 2024, the State Police are ordered to take immediate custodial action.
