Madhya Pradesh High Court Dismisses Repetitive Writ Petition, Imposes Costs on Petitioner

Successive petitions without new grounds deemed abuse of court process, petitioner penalized for frivolous litigation

In a significant judgment, the Madhya Pradesh High Court at Jabalpur, presided over by Justice Himanshu Joshi, dismissed a writ petition filed by Rahul Modi and others, which sought the consolidation of multiple FIRs against Adarsh Credit Co-operative Society Limited. The court found the petition to be a successive filing on the same cause of action, previously withdrawn without the liberty to re-file, thus constituting an abuse of the court's jurisdiction.

The petitioners had requested the clubbing and consolidation of various FIRs registered in different cities across Madhya Pradesh against the Society, citing prior judgments that disallow multiple FIRs for the same incident. However, the court noted that the petitioners had earlier filed a similar petition (W.P. No. 16685/2025), which was dismissed as withdrawn, with no granted liberty to file afresh on the same grounds.

In its judgment, the court emphasized the principle of finality in litigation, stating that the withdrawal of a petition without permission to re-file bars the petitioner from seeking the same relief again. Citing precedents from the Supreme Court, including the case of Sarguja Transport Service v. S.T.A.T., the court clarified that successive petitions without new grounds or subsequent orders undermine judicial integrity and waste judicial resources.

The court further highlighted the lack of any new orders or causes presented in the current petition that would justify a fresh hearing. The petitioners failed to demonstrate compliance with the limited liberty granted in the previous case to challenge any subsequent order.

As a deterrent against frivolous litigation, the court imposed a cost of Rs. 5,000 on the petitioner, directing the amount to be used for the welfare of the crèche facility within the High Court premises. This decision underscores the judiciary's commitment to maintaining the sanctity of legal processes and discouraging unnecessary litigation.

The judgment serves as a reminder of the consequences of misusing legal avenues and reaffirms the importance of adhering to procedural finality in judicial proceedings.

Bottom Line:

Successive writ petitions for the same relief are not maintainable if the earlier writ petition was withdrawn without liberty to re-file on the same cause of action. Filing such repetitive petitions amounts to abuse of the process of law.

Statutory provision(s): Constitution of India, Article 226

Rahul Modi v. State of Madhya Pradesh, (Madhya Pradesh)(Jabalpur) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2819317