If a government counsel presents an incorrect position of law, deliberately suppresses binding precedents, or misleads the court to secure an illegal order and if any citizen consequently suffers any harm or prejudice — then State is bound to compensate the victim. Directed payment of compensation of ₹5 lakh each to the aggrieved parties. [ Mahabir v. State of Haryana, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 184 ].
Supreme Court Slams “Manipulative Litigation” Tactics
In a strongly worded observation, the Supreme Court has come down heavily on the trend of obtaining judicial orders through incorrect presentation of law, suppression of binding precedents, and strategic exploitation of the system—especially in matters where the rights of the poor stand compromised.
The Court warned that governance of justice cannot survive if advocates mislead courts and secure illegal benefits by presenting what appears “law” but is not.
Justice Pardiwala Delivers Another Striking Verdict
Adding to a growing string of judicial accountability rulings, Justice J.B. Pardiwala has once again sent a sharp message to the legal fraternity. In Shikhar Chemicals v. State of U.P., 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1653, the Justice J.B. Pardiwala offered pointed remarks over the intellectual incompetence of a High Court judge, directing the Chief Justice not to assign any criminal cases to that judge henceforth. The move is being seen by the majority citizens as a rare but necessary intervention to preserve judicial integrity.
Compensation by State First — Recovery from Guilty Officials Thereafter
It is now a well-settled constitutional principle that where a citizen suffers injustice owing to the acts or omissions of Government Law Officers, the State is duty-bound to compensate the victim in the first instance, and thereafter recover the amount from the delinquent public servants responsible for such illegality.
This doctrine is not recent — it traces back more than a century. In a series of foundational rulings, the courts held that where an innocent person is subjected to illegal contempt action or is denied justice because of wrongful conduct of State Counsel, the Government cannot wash its hands off liability:
(1) Legal Remembrancer v. Matilal Ghose, (1914) ILR 41 Cal 173
(2) Parashuram Detaram Shamdasani v. King-Emperor, [1945] A.C. 264
(3) Ambard v. Attorney General for Trinidad, 1936 AC 322
(4) McLeod v. St. Aubyn, (1899) AC 549
(5) Ramesh Lawrence Maharaj v. State of Trinidad & Tobago, (1978) 2 WLR 902
Wherein even the State and the then Chief Justice were directed to pay compensation to a litigant who was falsely implicated in contempt proceedings.
The same principle was consistently applied in Indian jurisprudence:
(6) Walmik Bobde v. State of Maharashtra, 2001 ALL MR (Cri) 1731
(7) Bharat Devdan Salvi v. State of Maharashtra, 2016 SCC OnLine Bom 42
Holding that wrongful initiation or support of contempt proceedings against an innocent litigant makes the State liable for compensation.
Later, the Supreme Court further strengthened the law, holding that public money cannot be used to indemnify the wrongdoing of officials. Therefore, the amount paid by the State must necessarily be recovered from the guilty officials whose misconduct caused the illegal deprivation of rights:
(8) Lucknow Development Authority v. M.K. Gupta, AIR 1994 SC 787
(9) Demolition of Structures, In Re, (2025) 5 SCC 1
(10) S. Nambi Narayanan v. Siby Mathews, (2018) 10 SCC 804
(11) Mehmood Nayyar Azam v. State of Chhattisgarh, (2012) 8 SCC 1
Even if the opposing counsel forgets the law or presents it incorrectly, the responsibility to place the correct legal position before the Court lies squarely upon the Government Advocate as well as the Senior Counsel.
The role of a State Counsel or Senior Advocate is not limited merely to defending the Government or a party, but extends to a higher professional and constitutional obligation to present the correct law, complete facts, and the true legal position before the Court, fearlessly and without suppression.
Failure to discharge this duty amounts to professional misconduct. [Shiv Kumar v. Hukam Chand, (1999) 7 SCC 467; T.V. Choudhary, In Re, (1987) 3 SCC 258; State of Orissa v. Nalinikanta Muduli, (2004) 7 SCC 19, Sajid Khan Moyal v. State of Rajasthan, 2014 SCC OnLine Raj 1450,Sunita Pandey v. State of Uttarakhand, 2018 SCC OnLine Utt 933, State of Orissa v. Nalinikanta Muduli, (2004) 7 SCC 19, Hindustan Organic Chemicals Ltd. v. ICI India Ltd., 2017 SCC OnLine Bom 74, Kusha Duruka v. State of Odisha, (2024) 4 SCC 432]
Adv. Nilesh Ojha, President of the Indian Bar Association and a leading voice in the movement for judicial accountability, welcomed the judgment and described it as a defining moment in the history of Indian jurisprudence.
He stated:
“The era of privilege for the rich and punishment for the poor is coming to an end. India has entered a new age of accountability. Lawyers who mislead courts—by citing wrong law, suppressing truth and precedents—will no longer escape consequences. Very soon, the nation will witness the establishment of a real Rule of Law, where it is law that prevails—not rank, influence or power.”
He further said:
“This is a transformational phase for the Indian judicial system—where the voice of the common citizen is finally being heard again. The Supreme Court has sent a clear message: be it a Government Advocate, a police officer, a minister, or even a judge of the highest authority—no one is above the law. Accountability is no longer optional; it is inevitable.”
“Henceforth, only the law shall govern the courtroom—neither the ego of an advocate nor the dominance of a public official or political power. It is now becoming more evident that the supreme authority inside the court is truth, justice and the Constitution.”
Adv. Ojha emphasised:
“Under the Constitution, ‘All are equal before the law’ — and this principle is now turning into a national consciousness, articulated in simple but powerful language. Justice must not be influenced by face, position, religion, wealth, power or identity — it must rest solely on truth and the law.”
He added:
“Our demand is straightforward: Do not see who is right — see what is right.- “Treat everyone equally.”
This has now become the guiding principle of the common citizen’s expectation and the foundation of a judicial awakening across the nation.” “Real peace in society exists only where justice prevails.
Injustice never dies silently — it breeds anger, lawlessness, and ultimately, revolt.” “Today, this is no longer just a movement — it has evolved into a national mindset.”
The Indian Bar Association and several allied organisations have welcomed the judgment, calling it the outcome and rightful reward of 20 years of continuous struggle for judicial reform and justice for the people.
Over the past several months, the Supreme Court and multiple High Courts across India have delivered significant rulings—each contributing to the strengthening of the judicial system and making justice more accessible for ordinary citizens. These orders have not hesitated even to hold senior officials, bureaucrats and judges accountable, directing strict action wherever required.
A detailed sequence of these judicial developments has already been documented in previous reports and articles. ==The Supreme Court has now delivered a historic ruling—one that is expected to reshape the accountability framework within India’s justice system and place a firm check on negligence by government lawyers.
If a government lawyer cites incorrect law, suppresses binding Supreme Court precedents, or misleads the court—the penalty will fall upon the State. == The most transformative aspect of this decision is exceptionally clear:
**If a citizen suffers due to incorrect legal submissions, negligence, ignorance or deliberate misconduct by a government lawyer—the State will be liable to compensate the victim.**
The Law settled is :
• Presenting correct law before the Court is not optional—it is a constitutional and ethical duty of a government lawyer.
• If this duty is breached, the citizen cannot be made to suffer for it.
• Where incorrect legal advice, misleading arguments or suppression of binding precedents result in wrongful incarceration or violation of constitutional rights, the State must pay reparations and damages.
This ruling sets a revolutionary precedent for the entire nation—ensuring that truth, accuracy and integrity in the courtroom are not just expected, but enforceable.
Historic Legal Actions — Even Against the Most Powerful
Adv. Nilesh Ojha and his team undertook bold legal interventions in several high-stakes matters — supported by documentary evidence, research, and record-based complaints.
🔹 Against influential Senior Advocates
Proceedings were initiated even against giants of the bar — including Kapil Sibal and Abhishek Manu Singhvi — marking a decisive moment in India’s legal resistance.
🔹 Against corrupt ministers & top officials
Complaints and legal action were pursued against:
• Former Home Minister Anil Deshmukh
• Former IGP (CID) Abdur Rahman, and
• Other senior police & government officers — proving that power does not grant immunity from law.
🔹 Most historic — exposing judicial corruption
For the first time in Indian legal history, evidence-based complaints for criminal prosecution were filed against sitting & former judges, including:
• Justice Rohinton Nariman (Retd.)
• Justice Deepak Gupta (Retd.)
An act considered almost unthinkable earlier.
🔸 Action concerning CJI Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud
Criminal prosecution of then CJI Dr. D. Y. Chandrachud was sought on the basis of detailed proofs and obtained deemed sanction.
🔸 Justice Revati Mohite-Dere (Bombay High Court)
Serious allegations have been recorded against Justice Revati Mohite-Dere, including granting bail and extending undue relief to accused persons in multi-crore corruption cases, allegedly by suppressing CBI reports and disregarding binding Supreme Court directions.
A criminal-prosecution writ petition concerning these allegations is currently pending before a Special Bench constituted by the Hon’ble Chief Justice.
🔸 Other Judges Under Review
Complaints were also filed against Justice(retd.) Abhay Oka, Justice(retd.) D.S. Naidu, and others, reinstating a forgotten truth:
” Be whosoever high You are— the law is above You”.
Why is this moment historic?
For the first time in decades—
• Corrupt judges were publicly named,
• Prosecution of guilty Judges including former CJI Dr. D. Y. Chandrachud was demanded through evidence and as per law,
• And the nation understood: judges are not above law they can be prosecuted if they breach the law and involve in the corruption.
A new belief took root:
Criticising wrongdoing in judiciary is not contempt — it is national duty.
🌟 Result Today
Thousands of lawyers, millions of citizens, and honest officials now stand with this reform. The country realises that transparency is essential, wrong orders can be challenged, and law applies equally to citizen, officer and judge.
Essence of the movement
Not complaints — a legal revolution. 20 years of struggle has grown into:
➡ A national movement
➡ A legal awakening
➡ A culture of accountability
Led by Adv. Nilesh Ojha and the Indian Bar Association.
The Turning Point
When truth in law reaches the people, real Rule of Law begins.
What began as resistance is now a voice of the nation.
Opposition, Mockery & Suppression — the struggle began there
When Adv. Nilesh Ojha first asserted that “Misstating law is itself an offence, and corrupt lawyers & officials can be prosecuted like any other criminal,” the system reacted with shock. Many dismissed it as impossible.
What followed was—
• Years of mockery,
• Attempts to discredit him as “unrealistic” or “anti-system,”
• Threats, pressure, institutional resistance,
• And persistent efforts to stop the movement.
Weaponising Contempt to silence truth
Some judges and their allied lawyers, fearing exposure of internal corruption,
initiated multiple false contempt proceedings against him —
with the clear intent to Intimidate, Silence, And dismantle the movement.
It was a misuse of legal machinery — an attempt to turn the truth-speaker into the accused.
But truth did not bend — it rose stronger
Every attack only strengthened the movement.
Because behind it stood:
✔ The prayers of the victims,
✔ The trust of the people,
✔ The power of law & Constitution,
✔ And the shield of truth.
False cases collapsed one after another in High Courts and the Supreme Court —
proving that: Truth cannot be silenced. Law ultimately stands with justice.
And today — the result is visible
Those who tried to crush the movement stand exposed.
Meanwhile—
• Citizens and lawyers across India have joined in,
• Landmark judgments have validated the reform,
• And every assault only amplified the revolution.
The more resistance it faced — the louder this voice became.
The stronger the justice movement grew.
Today, the situation has completely transformed. Truth and justice now speak louder than ever — and that is why this 20-year struggle has evolved into a nationwide judicial awakening.
Today, this movement includes:
• Lawyers across the country
• Ordinary citizens
• Government officials
• Police personnel
• And even honest members of the judiciary
This is no longer a battle fought by Adv. Nilesh Ojha alone —
it has become the movement of an entire nation.
✊ A fight that began two decades ago
is today the voice of millions.
It stands as proof that:
When the fight is for truth, and the weapon is law — then the Universe and God stand with us. And if God be for us, who can stand against us?
No power on earth can stop such a movement.
