Registry flagging defects in petition not violation of fundamental rights: Kerala High Court

The Kerala High Court recently came down heavily on a petitioner who claimed that High Court registry flagging defects in the petition filed by him amounted to violation of his fundamental rights [Asif Azad v Union of India & Ors.]..The petitioner Asif Azad moved the Court seeking directions to be issued to the registry to refrain from scrutinising and finding defects in his petition. .Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas said that he could not comprehend the reasoning behind the petitioner's contention, and pointed out that as per Rule 50 of the Rules of the High Court of Kerala, 1971, it is the function of the Registry to scrutinize petitions which are filed before it.“This Court is unable to comprehend how the defects noted by the Registry of this Court in the writ petitions filed can be attributed to allegations of violating fundamental rights. One of the functions bestowed upon the Registry is to scrutinize the petitions filed before the Court. Rule 15 and Rule 50 of the Rules of the High Court of Kerala, 1971 confer power upon the Registry to notice any defects in the petitions or applications filed before the Court,” the Court said in its judgment..Access to justice, though a fundamental right, cannot be extended to a right to prefer misconceived and frivolous petitions.Kerala High Court.Even the other orders that the petitioner sought were, in the Court's opinion, odious and repugnant and, therefore, costs of ₹25,000 were imposed on him."The proclivity to file writ petitions without any basis and to threaten the system into ridicule cannot be permitted under any count. Access to justice, though a fundamental right, cannot be extended to a right to prefer misconceived and frivolous petitions. The nature of reliefs claimed for and the nebulous pleadings are indicative of absence of any particular right of the petitioner having been infringed," the Court underscored..Azad in his plea also sought directions to the Central and State governments to suspend 35 public officials from their official duties. He alleged that these 35 officials were influencing others to destroy his life and was even deceiving the Court. Supporting his claim, it was alleged that his signature has been forged in some government security documents and that these 35 officials had disobeyed the directions of law and violated his fundamental rights.He further contended that he noticed the influence of these officials even inside the High Court when he saw government pleaders arguing for them..The Court took a dim view of the petitioner's actions.It said that there was no material to substantiate his contentions and also noted that he had previously filed various other petitions with similar allegations and prayersMoreover, it noted that a Magistrate had dismissed a complaint moved by the petitioner with similar allegations and that the petitioner had already filed an appeal against it. Under such circumstances, the Court opined that the petition which was moved under Article 226 amounted to a misuse of the process of law and, therefore, dismissed the same and imposed costs on the petitioner, payable to the Kerala State Legal Services Authority. "The nature of pleadings and the reliefs claimed for reveals that the writ petition is filed on an experimental basis and in bad taste.The manner in which the petitioner has raised his pleadings in the writ petition and the nature of reliefs sought compels this Court to visit the petitioner with costs as a disincentive for indulging in such frivolous writ petitions," the Court said in its judgment..The petitioner appeared in-person.The respondents were represented by Deputy Solicitor General of India (DSGI) S Manu and Public Prosecutor P Narayanan..[Read Judgment]