Commodum Ex Injuria Sua Nemo Habere Debet

17 May 2018

In the case of Inderjit Singh Grewal V/s State of Punjab[1], the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that:

Respondent 2 herself had been a party to the fraud committed by the appellant upon the civil court for getting the decree of divorce as alleged by her in the impugned complaint. Thus, according to her own admission she herself is an abettor to the crime. A person alleging his own infamy cannot be heard at any forum as explained by the legal maxim "allegans suam turpetudinem non est audiendus". No one should have an advantage from his own wrong (commondum ex injuria sua memo habere debet). No action arises from an immoral cause (ex turpi cause non oritur action). Damage suffered by consent is not a cause of action (volenti non fit injuria). The statements/allegations made by the Respondent 2 patently and latently involve her in the alleged fraud committed upon the Court. Thus, she made herself disentitled for any equitable relief.

[1] (2011) 12 SCC 588 – Para 22

Recent Blogs