Madras: The Madras high court said that when government officials provide false or misleading information to government lawyers, it directly interferes with the administration of justice because courts rely on submissions made by government counsel. The observations came while hearing a land encroachment case in Tamil Nadu.
Madras High Court False Information Ruling: Key Highlights
- Madras High Court warned that giving false information to government lawyers may amount to contempt of court.
- The Court found that an important entry in a revenue record appeared to have been concealed.
- The Bench directed the Registrar (Judicial) to seek an explanation from the concerned Tahsildar.
- The Court will decide later whether to begin suo motu contempt proceedings.
- The case also involved alleged encroachment on a water body.
What Is The Case About
The case was filed by residents J. Abdul Malik and J. Siddiq Ali from Tiruchirappalli district. The petitioners claimed that a water channel had been blocked and encroached upon. They requested the Court to direct authorities to remove the alleged encroachments from the water body.
Madras High Court False Information Ruling: What Did The Madras High Court Say
A Bench of Justice G.R. Swaminathan and Justice B. Pugalendhi observed that government officials must provide accurate information to government lawyers. The judges said courts depend on submissions made by government advocates, who in turn rely on official records and instructions. Supplying false information can interfere with the administration of justice and may amount to contempt of court.
Why Did The Court Make This Observation
During the hearing, the government initially informed the Court that one survey number was private patta land. However, the petitioners produced an official A-Register extract showing that the same survey number had been recorded as a water spread area. The Court also noticed that this important entry appeared to be missing from the photocopy supplied to the government advocate.
What Did The Court Find In The Revenue Records
The Bench observed that the remarks column in the original revenue record identified the land as a water spread area. But the corresponding remarks column in the photocopy given to the government advocate appeared blank, raising concerns that the record may have been altered or concealed.
Madras High Court False Information Ruling: What Directions Did The Court Issue
The Court directed authorities to maintain the character of the land as a water spread area. It also ordered that alleged encroachments should be removed after giving the affected parties notice and an opportunity to be heard. The entire exercise has been directed to be completed within four months.
Read also: Thiruparankundram Hill Case: Supreme Court Issues Notice, No Stay On Madras High Court Order
