Multiple pleas for identical relief amounts to ‘forum shopping’: Punjab and Haryana High Court

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has made it clear that filing multiple petitions through different lawyers and parties for identical relief apparently amounted to “forum shopping”. The assertion came as Justice Vinod S Bhardwaj of the High Court dismissed a petition with Rs 30,000 costs after taking a note of this “misplaced adventure” and “misconduct”.

Advertisement

Taking up a petition filed against the state and other respondents by a woman, Justice Bhardwaj asserted the petitioner approached the court seeking directions to Additional Director-General of Police (Jails) and Superintendent of Bathinda Central Jail to take appropriate steps for protecting the life of her convict son as “necessary food, medicine and other facilities were not being extended to him”. This, the petitioner alleged, was violative of the convict’s fundamental rights.

Justice Bhardwaj asserted the state counsel, during the course of hearing, stated that the convict had filed another petition, which was disposed of by a coordinate Bench on Friday, August 23. It was noticed that the court was closed for the next two days and that the instant petition was prepared immediately on “the first opening date after the dismissal of the earlier writ petition”.

Going into the background of the matter, Justice Bhardwaj observed the convict, it seemed, was earlier lodged in a Ropar jail. He was shifted to the Bathinda Central Jail during the pendency of the proceedings. Another petition was then filed, seeking directions to take appropriate steps against imminent danger and threats to his life and liberty. Both petitions were disposed of by the detailed order, dated August 23. The relief asked for was declined after noticing the objections by the state.

The instant writ petition for identical relief was been filed through the mother on August 27 in quick succession, but the institution of the earlier writ petitions and their status was not disclosed by the petitioner in the present case.

“It is thus apparently a case of forum shopping, for identical reliefs, by filing multiple petitions for the same relief and cause through different persons and lawyers so as to fish out a relief for themselves. Such a conduct on the part of the litigant deserves deprecation and the petitioner needs to be burdened with costs as well. 5. Accordingly for the misplaced adventure and misconduct on the part of the petitioner, the present writ petition is dismissed with a cost of Rs 30,000 to be recovered from the petitioner,” Justice Bhardwaj concluded.