Award of Lok Adalat obtained by playing fraud on Court can be quashed and the proceedings can be revived.

The Higher Courts in India are constantly encouraging alternative dispute mechanism for dispute resolutions in a range of matters including Motor Accidents Claim, Family Disputes, and Negotiable Instruments complaints (‘Cheque Bounce cases’). Most of the time the parties are encouraged to choose Lok Adalat route for their ‘timely’ dispute resolution. The data suggest that Lok Adalat proves to be a successful mechanism if ‘disposal rate’ is the ultimate determining factor.

The Cheque bounce cases are unique when Lok Adalat is concerned. Firstly, it is a quasi-criminal proceeding which entails punitive action such as imprisonment and fine. And, Secondly, the proceedings are summary in nature. Therefore, many a time the accused/convict of S. 138 ‘cheque bounce case’ takes a route to settle the dispute by giving the undertaking to pay the amount in a definitive period as agreed by both the parties. The parties are told to wait till the next scheduled Lok Adalat. In Lok Adalat an award is passed and the appeal of the convict is allowed in terms of the settlement pursis/undertaking. Many times, the undertaking remains on paper only and the signatory of the undertaking failed to comply with the order of the Lok Adalat.

The remedy in such a case, is very limited. As the Lok Adalat is governed by the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987. Section 21 of the said act provides that Every award of the Lok Adalat shall be deemed to be a decree of a civil court and no appeal shall lie against any award of the Lok Adalat. Here comes the legal question as to what is the remedy available for a victim of Cheque Bounce case who succeeds in his complaint and, in appeal the convict undertakes to pay the amount and, on the basis of that the award is passed. The answer is to file execution proceedings as provided under the Civil Procedure Code. The execution proceedings in itself is a very tedious process. What if the victim/complainant wants to revive the proceedings in which the accused/convict has given the undertaking.

In a Judgment of Sonal Thakkar V. State of Gujarat (Special Criminal Application (Quashing) No.690 of 2018) High Court of Gujarat observed, …Having regard to the conduct of the respondent no.2 (the accused), I have no doubt in my mind that he played fraud with the appellate Court, at the time, when the Criminal Appeal No.186 of 2014 came to be disposed of in view of the undertaking, which was given by the respondent no.2 to make the  payment within  a period of one year. It is clear that the no.2 had no intention of making any payment. He, however, was desperate to get out of the jail and in such circumstances, misled the appellate Court and got himself acquitted.  And held that, Any judgment or order obtained by fraud is a nullity and non­est in the eye of law. It could be challenged in any Court at any time in appeal, revision, writ or even in collateral proceedings.

The Court ultimately quashed and set aside the award of the Lok Adalat and the proceedings of Criminal Appeal is revived.