SC: Clarificatory Statement Does Not Constitute a Binding Undertaking for Contempt Proceedings  ||  Supreme Court: Litigant Cannot be Worse Off for Filing an Appeal under ‘No Reformatio in Peius’  ||  Orissa HC: Article 22(1) Arrest Rights Pre-Exist, Written Grounds Ruling Not Prospective  ||  Kerala HC: Kissing a Child’s Penis Constitutes Penetrative Sexual Assault under POCSO  ||  Madras HC: Married Daughter Cannot be Denied Compassionate Appointment Solely for Her Marriage  ||  Bombay High Court: Child Welfare Prevails as ‘Joint Parenting’ is Not Recognised in Indian Law  ||  Kerala HC: Minor’s Consent or Relationship with Accused Holds No Relevance under POCSO Act  ||  Bombay HC: Failure to Prove Exact Quantum of Loss Does Not Bar Compensation  ||  CCPA Fines Dial4Trade Rs. 10 Lakh for Online Ammonium Nitrate Listing Featuring Blast Images  ||  Supreme Court: Multiple Cases Alone Cannot Justify an Externment Order    

Naresh Kumar Sehgal v. Union of India and Ors. - (High Court of Punjab and Haryana) (31 Jul 2015)

No entertaining of petition by seeker of 'a halo of a persecuted man'

MANU/PH/2183/2015

Criminal

Taking note that the Petitioner had filed 218 petitions before court, with 20 petitions dated 20 August, 2015 alone, the High Court directed the Registry to not entertain further petitions by the Petitioner of the kind he had been filing. The Court observed that the Petitioner filed frivolous petitions 'levelling wild allegations' in the name of public cause and social work.

Relevant : Moti Lal Songara vs. Prem Prakash @ Pappu and Anr. MANU/SC/0539/2013 M.C.D. vs. State of Delhi and Anr. MANU/SC/0376/2005 Dr. B. Singh vs. Union of India (UOI) and Ors. MANU/SC/0211/2004

Tags : FRIVOLOUS   VEXATIOUS   LITIGATION   BARRED  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved