Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2001 DIGILAW 124 (PAT)

Kumud Bihari Singh v. Union Of India

2001-02-12

RAVI S.DHAVAN, SHASHANK KR.SINGH

body2001
Judgment 1. In a matter like the present one all that the petitioner has done is that he has taken out newspaper clippings and appended to the affidavit to sustain a public interest litigation. As a generality the Court cannot encourage such an exercise in filing of the public interest litigation. 2. The petitioner relies on a report submitted to the Government of India. The report has not been placed before the Court. Further, there is nothing in the petition to indicate that before filing the writ petition before the High Court any authority has been in inaction. 3. In the present case the petitioner refers to the conduct of elections on the assertion that persons having criminal background should not be permitted to participate in an election. The petitioner has not taken the trouble to address the Election Commission of India first. 4. In the circumstances, the present petition is being consigned without commenting on the merits of the issues.