Introduction

In this significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India addressed the issue of whether a second Special Leave Petition (SLP) is maintainable after the withdrawal of the first one without liberty to file afresh. The Court referred the matter to a Larger Bench to settle the conflicting views that have arisen in previous judgments.

Background and Facts

The dispute involved a civil property matter where the petitioner initially filed an SLP before the Supreme Court challenging the High Court’s order. However, the first SLP was withdrawn without any liberty granted to file afresh. Subsequently, the petitioner filed a second SLP on the same cause of action. The respondent opposed its maintainability, contending that such a practice would amount to abuse of process.

Issue

Whether the withdrawal of an earlier SLP without liberty bars the filing of a second SLP on the same cause of action?

Arguments

Petitioner’s Arguments

• The withdrawal of the first SLP does not amount to res judicata.

• Since the earlier SLP was not adjudicated on merits, the petitioner retains the right to file another SLP.

• Dismissing the second SLP without hearing would curtail the fundamental right to access justice.

Respondent’s Arguments

• A second SLP on the same issue is not maintainable once the first has been withdrawn.

• Such repeated filings would lead to forum shopping and delay in finality of litigation.

• Past judgments have stressed that withdrawal without liberty bars a fresh petition.

Judgment

The Supreme Court, noting conflicting precedents on the subject, referred the issue to a Larger Bench. It observed:

• The maintainability of a second SLP after withdrawal of the first without liberty requires authoritative clarification.

• Earlier rulings have taken divergent views, making judicial consistency necessary.

• Till such clarification, scrutiny of similar cases should be cautious to avoid abuse of process.

Conclusion

This judgment underscores the Supreme Court’s concern over repeated litigation and abuse of process in SLP filings. By referring the matter to a Larger Bench, the Court aims to ensure uniformity in law on the maintainability of second SLPs, striking a balance between access to justice and the need for finality in litigation.