Play store
The High Court on Wednesday fined GPH Ispat Tk 50 million for concealing material information while filing a writ petition, despite a related case already being pending before the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court.
A High Court bench comprising Justice Md. Nazrul Islam Talukder and Justice Mahmud Hossain directed the company to deposit the fine with the Registrar General of the Supreme Court within one month.
The court also ordered that the money be used for the treatment and welfare of those injured during the July mass uprising.
Attorney General Barrister Md. Ruhul Quddus Kajal, who represented the state during the hearing, said the company had previously obtained an order from the High Court on the same matter. However, that order was later stayed by the Chamber Judge of the Appellate Division.
Despite the stay order, GPH Ispat subsequently filed a fresh case in a lower court and later sought an injunction from the High Court, he said.
According to the Attorney General, the company failed to disclose the existence of the earlier writ petition, the Appellate Division’s stay order and the ongoing judicial proceedings while seeking relief from the High Court.
“Attempting to obtain a court order by concealing material facts amounts to a fraud upon the court,” Kajal told reporters after the hearing.
He said that after the matter was brought to the court’s attention, lawyers representing the petitioner offered an unconditional apology and claimed they were unaware of the earlier proceedings.
The Attorney General further said the state had requested the court to impose exemplary costs because of the company’s lack of candour and concealment of facts.
Accepting the request, the High Court ordered GPH Ispat to deposit Tk 50 million within one month with the Supreme Court Registrar General.
The court specified that the amount would be spent on medical treatment and welfare programmes for those injured during the July mass uprising.
Kajal described the ruling as a significant message in favour of maintaining transparency and integrity in judicial proceedings.
“The order reflects the court’s firm stance against dishonesty and suppression of material facts in legal proceedings,” he said.