Disposed¶¶17

S.Vignesh Shishir v. Union of India Thru. Secy. Ministry of Home Affairs New Delhi and 21 Others

Criminal Writ-PIL (Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench) – Maintainability – Forum non conveniens

Allahabad HC2 Jun 2026CRPIL/7/2026

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

forum non conveniens; maintainability of criminal PIL; territorial jurisdiction; writ petition; Lucknow Bench; Allahabad High Court; Karnataka High Court; Bengaluru petitioner; withdrawal with liberty; fresh writ petition; Cockroach Janta Party; Abhijit Dipke; NIA inquiry; ED inquiry; social media blocking; anti-national activities; S. Vignesh Shishir; petitioner in person.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to file a fresh criminal public interest writ petition before a Court having competent jurisdiction; no relief granted on the allegations against Sri Abhijit Dipke or the prayers for NIA/ED inquiry and blocking of social media accounts. ¶¶17

S.Vignesh Shishir vs Union of India Thru. Secy. Ministry of Home Affairs New Delhi and 21 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶17

Issue for consideration

Whether the criminal public interest writ petition is maintainable before the Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench, when the petitioner is a permanent resident of Bengaluru and nothing specific to the State of Uttar Pradesh is raised (forum non conveniens). +1 more

¶¶14

Court's answer

The writ petition is not maintainable before this Court (Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench) due to forum non conveniens; the petitioner, a permanent resident of Bengaluru raising an issue of national importance, should have first approached the Karnataka High Court, as nothing specific to the State of Uttar Pradesh was found in the writ petition.

¶¶14

Ratio / Principle

The writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh criminal public interest writ petition before a Court having competent jurisdiction.

¶¶17

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal Writ-PIL (Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench) — Maintainability — Forum non conveniens — Petitioner, a permanent resident of Bengaluru, filed a criminal public interest litigation against the founder of an unregistered organization styled 'Cockroach Janta Party', alleging it to be a foreign and deep-state-funded organization carrying out anti-national activities, and sought a deep and pervasive inquiry by the National Investigation Agency and the Enforcement Directorate and immediate shutdown/blocking of related social media accounts — Held: nothing in the writ petition was specific to the State of Uttar Pradesh; the petitioner ought to have first approached the Karnataka High Court; the writ petition was not maintainable before this Court due to forum non conveniens — On the Court's view being made known, the petitioner sought leave to withdraw — Writ petition disposed of with liberty to file a fresh criminal public interest writ petition before a Court having competent jurisdiction.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

CRIMINAL WRIT-PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION No. - 7 of 2026

S.Vignesh Shishir

.....Petitioner(s)

Versus

Union Of India Thru. Secy. Ministry Affairs New Delhi And 21 Others	Of Home .....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) :	In Person
Counsel for Respondent(s) :	A.S.G.I., C.S.C., Kuldeep Srivastava

¶7

Court No. - 2

¶8

HON'BLE SHEKHAR B. SARAF, J. HON'BLE ABDHESH KUMAR CHAUDHARY, J.

¶9

Heard Sri S. Vignesh Shishir, the petitioner appearing in person, Sri S.B. Pandey, learned Senior Advocate & DSGI assisted by Sri Raj Kumar Singh and Sri Anand Dwivedi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents No.1 to 6 & 8 to 12, Ms. Shikha Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No.7, Sri Kuldeep Srivastava, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No.13 and Ms. Deepshikha, learned Chief Standing Counsel assisted by Sri Pankaj Khare and Ms. Isha Mittal, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the State-respondents No.14 & 15.

¶10

Sri S. Vignesh Shishir has filed this criminal public interest litigation against one Sri Abhijit Dipke, a resident of Pune, Maharashtra, presently residing in the United States of America, and the founder of an unregistered organization named as "Cockroach Janta Party". The petitioner has contended that Sri Abhijit Dipke has founded the said Cockroach Janta Party, which is a foreign and deep-state-funded organization planted by antinational elements that are carrying out anti-national activities which could seriously harm the sovereignty, integrity and security of India. Several allegations have been made by the writ petitioner and the petitioner has sought a deep and pervasive inquiry to be carried out by the National Investigation Agency and the Enforcement Directorate. He has further submitted that several social media accounts are being operated on various platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, WhatsApp, Telegram,

¶11

CRPIL No. 7 of 2026

¶12

¶13

Signal Messenger, Twitter and other social media intermediaries, wherein anti-national activities are being perpetrated by inciting the Gen Z (youth) of the nation. He has accordingly also prayed that such accounts be immediately shut down/blocked by the Government of India. Several other ancillary allegations and prayers have also been made by the petitioner.

¶14

Upon perusal of the writ petition, the first thing that strikes us is that the petitioner is a permanent resident of Bengaluru. In the cause title as well as in the affidavit, the petitioner shows his address as No.4, First Main, First Cross, Nehru Nagar, Sheshadripuram, Bengaluru-560020. In our view, the petitioner, being a resident of Bengaluru and raising an issue that is of national importance, should have first approached the Karnataka High Court, if he so desired. In the present writ petition, we do not find anything specific to the State of Uttar Pradesh, and accordingly, we are of the view that the writ petition is not maintainable before this Court due to forum non conveniens.

¶15

The petitioner has submitted that certain complaints have been made by him from an address in Lucknow. However, the petitioner, on earlier occasions, has appeared before this Court and categorically stated that he is a resident of Bengaluru and has sought preference and indulgence from this Court on the ground that he comes from Bengaluru.

¶16

Once the view of the Court that the writ petition was not maintainable on the ground of jurisdiction was made known to the petitioner, he prayed that he be allowed to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to file a fresh writ petition before the Court having competent jurisdiction.

¶17

In light of the same, the writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid liberty of filing a fresh criminal public interest writ petition before a Court having competent jurisdiction.

¶18

June 2, 2026 cks/-

¶19

(Abdhesh Kumar Chaudhary,J.) (Shekhar B. Saraf,J.)

¶20

Digitally signed by :- CHANDRA KANT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

S.Vignesh Shishir v. Union of India Thru. Secy. Ministry of Home Affairs New Delhi and 21 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Vignesh Shishir v. Union of India Thru. Secy. Ministry of Home Affairs New Delhi and 21 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Syed Rafat Zubair Rizvi vs Deputy Commissioner 01 Income Tax Lko. and 2 Others

Syed Rafat Zubair Rizvi vs Deputy Commissioner 1 Income Tax Lko . and 2 Others

Victim a in Fir No. 370/2021 Thru. Next Best Friend Her Mother vs State of U.P. Thru. Chief Secy. Lko. and Another

Union of India, Thru. Secy. Ministry of Defence Dhq Po, New Delhi and 4 Others vs No. 678525 H Ex Mwo Ramesh Chandra Prajapati

M/S Balaji Construction and General Order Suppliers Thru. Proprietor Narendra Kumar Misra vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. State Tax Lko. and Another

Tilak Dhari vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Revenue Lko. and 7 Others