Rise in abuse of PIL: An overview

Prefix Constitution of India, Public Interest Litigation, supreme court and high courts, Writs

The author of this article is ADARSH SACHDEV, 6th Semester 3 Year LLB student at Government Law College, Ernakulam. The article titled ‘RISE IN ABUSE OF PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATIONS: AN OVERVIEW’ seeks to draw light upon the increasing number of Public Interest Litigations in recent times.

Every democracy rests its pillars on the citizens from the helm of whom the state is supposed to be steered to pre-eminence with regard to both economic and sociological opulence. Even as a plethora of redressal mechanisms exists it is often deemed futile if the subjects to whom it is made available are unable to process the same. Analyzing this notion from the Indian context will open an often over-stated but largely unaddressed issue. It is in this situation that the concept of PIL or public interest litigation becomes decisive. Fortunately or unfortunately based on subjective preference the system of Public Interest Litigation has not been defined in any of the Indian statutes. This offers the court to determine as to what may be deemed as in Public interest or not. Hence the public is not bound by any law as to initiate a PIL given that it is in the interest of the public. Accordingly, Courts have interpreted and defined PIL.

The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has, in the case of Janata Dal v. H.S.Chaudhary, [(AIR 1993 SC 892)], held that lexically, the expression ‘PIL’ means a legal action started in a court of law for the enforcement of public/general interest where the public or a particular class of the public some interest (including pecuniary interest) that affects their legal rights or liabilities. PILs can be stated as an effective vessel in tackling social evils affecting the public as any kind of matter where the public at large is affected whether directly or indirectly can be redressed by filing a PIL in the concerned Court. But even while being considered to be a jewel in the crown of the Indian Judicial system there has been a trend in recent years for filing frivolous and ill-motivated PIL which the judiciary has obviously rebutted on multiple occasions with the recent being a PIL in which the honorable SC dismissed the case with ₹5,000 cost also making specific statements as the same amounted to an abuse of process.

❖ WHAT IS PIL?

Public interest litigations are litigations instigated by public-spirited individuals on account of any issue that is detrimental to the public at large or on behalf of the poor who by virtue of any ailment both economic and sociological are unable to initiate themselves. In simple words, means, it denoted litigation filed in a court of law, for the protection of Public Interest, such as pollution, Road safety, constructional hazards, etc. It owes its inception to US legal system. Public interest litigation is not defined in any statute or in any act. It has been interpreted by judges to consider the intent of the public at large.

Although, the main and only focus of such litigation is only Public Interest there are various areas where public interest litigation can be filed and in that light, it can be stated that the wide ambit of PILs provides an effective mechanism for redressal to the parties not being confined to a traditional and static notion as to what may be deemed as just before the court or not. Public Interest Litigations can be filed in the Supreme Court and High Courts by invoking their writ jurisdiction under Article 32 and Article 226 respectively. Article 32 deals with the rights of citizens to move to the Supreme Court against violation of rights conferred by Part III of the constitution, which can issue the writs of mandamus, habeas corpus, certiorari, and quo-warranto as applicable to the case. Article 226 empowers High Courts to issue writs within their jurisdiction in cases of violation of rights mentioned in Part III of the Constitution.

Based on various decisions of Courts in the past, a general notion as to what can be deemed redressal under PILs can be put forth. They can be briefed as follows to get a common understanding as to which all issues are capable of being addressed under PILs in India. The main element to be noted in this light is that no petition involving individual/ personal matter shall be filed before the court in exercising the right for redressal under PILs except the matters as indicated hereinafter.

1. Bonded Labour matters.

2. Neglected Children.

3. Non-payment of minimum wages to workers and exploitation of casual workers and complaints of violation of Labour Laws (except in individual cases).

4. Petitions from jails complaining of harassment, for (pre-mature release)* and seeking release after having completed 14 years in jail, death in jail, transfer, release on personal bond, speedy trial as a fundamental right.

(5) Petitions against police for refusing to register a case, harassment by police, and death in police custody.

(6) Petitions against atrocities on women, in particular, harassment of bride, bride burning, rape, murder, kidnapping, etc.

(7) Petitions to complain of harassment or torture of villagers by co- villagers or by police from persons belonging to Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes and economically backward classes.
(8) Petitions pertaining to environmental pollution, disturbance of ecological balance, drugs, food adulteration, maintenance of heritage and culture, antiques, forest and wildlife, and other matters of public importance.

(9) Petitions from riot -victims.

(10) Family Pension.

This data itself shows the importance which PILs have in the Indian system as such issues have a tendency to go under the radar due to various factors existent in them and the prejudices that the victims might face when pitted against powerful entities. In such instances any person given that he is an Indian citizen can file a PIL, the only condition being that it should not be filed with private interest, but in the noble interest of the public. The courts themselves have taken cognizance on several occasions when the matter was of that much public importance.

❖ INSTANCES OF ABUSE OF PIL IN RECENT TIMES

The eminent position of PILs in India has often been discolored by the plethora of cases of this nature filed politically and otherwise frivolous natured individuals with the motivation to satiate their own agendas. The Delhi High Court had recently dismissed with costs of Rs 25,000 of a PIL seeking to deport all foreign nationals who are in custody for overstaying in India beyond the period of expiration of their visas. A bench of Chief Justice D N Patel and Justice Jyoti Singh stated in this litigation that the so-called public interest litigation was preferred for some particular motive or agendas, and hence directed the petitioner to deposit the amount of the costs with the Delhi State Legal Services Authority within 4 weeks.

The Calcutta High Court in a similar fashion dismissed a PIL filed with the reference to certain highly technical issues pertaining to Covid-19 vaccination, where the court refused to say anything on the efficacy of the Covid-19 vaccine. A Division Bench of Acting Chief Justice Rajesh Bindal and Justice Rajarshi Bharadwaj expressed that the present case does not call for interference by the High Court as there is no expertise available to comment on the effectiveness of the vaccines or their side-effects as is sought to be argued by learned Counsel for the petitioners.

Similarly, The Supreme Court dismissed a batch of appeals filed by some people related to a 2009 housing project in Maharashtra”s Osmanabad district against a Bombay High Court order which had led to the filing of an FIR against them for alleged irregularities in the scheme. A bench comprising justices L Nageswara Rao and S Ravindra Bhat took note of the judicial records and the fact that out of over 1200 dwelling units for the poor, 302 housing units were constructed in different localities of Naldurg municipality and of which 202 could be used and 100 were in an unusable and dilapidated condition.

The Supreme Court has also dismissed in close vicinity of a PIL seeking compensation for lawyers who died of Covid-19 as bogus and imposed a cost of ₹10,000 on the lawyer who filed the public interest litigation (PIL) terming it as public interest litigation. The PIL filed by advocate Pradeep Kumar Yadav demanded ₹50 lakh compensation for a family of lawyers aged less than 60 years who died due to Covid-19 or any other reasons.

The Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court (HC) has in light of the recent political climate dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL), which sought directives to the Centre to provide political asylum in accordance with international law to three Afghan nationals. The High Court also imposed a cost of ₹10,000 on the petitioner.

❖ A BRIEF STUDY ON THE REASON FOR ABUSE OF PILS

A basic analysis of this trend may indicate that many of the PILs in recent years have been lodged on frivolous claims often underlooking the main issue at hand often fueled by the need to seek attention on an issue that would be readily available if the higher courts take up the issue and then, of course, there is the process of showing political solidarity and political vengeance by filing PILs by the motivated individuals all the while knowing that the same will be rebutted by the court, but the clout created by the same would serve to satiate their political needs. India’s Jammu & Kashmir High Court recently dismissed with costs a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petition supposedly being filed in the name of public interest, remarking that PIL is not a “pill for every ill”, flagging concerns over repeated misuse of the power and intent of the legal procedure in the case of Nikhil Padha, Human Rights Activist V/s Chairman Human Rights Commission.

Many eminent scholars of law and individuals have on various occasions expressed their dismay at the recent PILs filed for everything and anything coming even meagerly under the ambit of Public Interest. The thought-provoking statement of this all is that of non-other than the solicitor general of India Tushar Mehta whose expression that PIL has become a career in themselves is worth note and a close inspection would prove the same to be true. This statement before the Delhi High court can be stated as a part of a string of opinions of eminent legal entities regarding the system of PILs being filed in recent times. The Centre represented by the solicitor general stated in the Delhi High Court when considering the appointment of Gujarat-cadre Indian Police Services (IPS) officer Rakesh Asthana as Delhi Police Commissioner that filing Public Interest Litigations (PILs) has become an industry and a career in itself, drawing upon the political lineage behind the recent PILs before Courts. It is also in this light that the recent case before Uttarankand High court is to be viewed whereupon Justice Alok Verma and Justice Raghavendra Chauhan contemplated that “Petitioners Are Merely Puppets At Hands Of An Unknown Puppeteer”.

In similar instances, Courts have expressed the remarks that “professional PIL shops must be locked down”, which when given a close introspection are true. It is a sad truth that a portion of petitioners’ PILs is newer “public-spirited persons” and only used the PIL petition as a means to gratify personal agendas in accordance with their perspective. In that light, it can be stated that People have started misusing the PIL to settle their personal vendettas and serve political or business interests. In a way the merit of PIL has come back to haunt it as what is meant for defense can be used equally effectively for offence, the lowering of the locus standi requirement has facilitated a plethora of litigation instigated to Satiate the individual and dubious motivates to pose as public interests thereby spoiling creating a negative apprehension in the mind of the society that any forms of political or private interest can be redressed by PILs, the most unfortunate element in false PIL cases lies in the instance that the political parties themselves who are sought as the representatives of the public have taken up this jewel in the crown of Indian judicial system as a tool to instigate political vendetta, Thankfully the Indian Judiciary is much more evolved to realize this and has at times gone to great lengths to ensure that the integrity of this noble vision is preserved.

The issue is not just confined to politicians and their political agendas, the political pressure groups also influence and instigate and at times have taken the wing of religious and social elements to hide their intentions. Many people have started using PIL as a tool in order to register false frivolous and motivated cases to hamper the reputation of people. This has in some way been facilitated although unintentionally by the fact that to file a PIL the associated cost is low in comparison to private litigation. The relaxation to have a locus standi has often led people to pose their private interests as public interests. The court has in such special circumstances warned that PIL should be treated as a “public interest litigation” and not a “private interest litigation”.

❖ CONCLUSION

Even Courts while addressing PILs have started to take a more practical and strict approach due to this dilemma of abuse of PILs the most recent being the dismissal by a division bench of the Telangana High Court comprising Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice A Rajashekar Reddy, on Thursday of the PILs and writ petitions seeking the suspension of the Election Commission of India (ECI) order deferring the implementation of Dalit Bandhu scheme in Huzurabad Assembly segment. Such an uncompromising view taken by court is one to be scrutinised as a further subjective interpretation as to what is public interest be needed in light of the recent PILs for a better future to the system of Public Interest Litigation in India.

Rise in abuse of PIL: An overview

❖ WHAT IS PIL?

❖ INSTANCES OF ABUSE OF PIL IN RECENT TIMES

❖ A BRIEF STUDY ON THE REASON FOR ABUSE OF PILS

❖ CONCLUSION

❖ REFERENCES

Subscribe Now