The Supreme Court of India held on Tuesday that the High Court Judges should not entertain ananymous letters or petitions containing allegations against any person or organisation and treat them as public interest litigation and order for suo motu investigation.
The Supreme Court Bench, headed by Justices S.H.Kapadia and B.Sudershan Reddy said’ Setting criminal law in motion is a serious matter and the High court should not exercise its jurisdiction under Article 226 to consider an anonymous letter or petition as public interest litigation,practically coverting the courts into station houses.’
It also added that no court should pass any order against a person which may result in the serious consequenses to him, without giving a reasonable opportunity to the person to explain himself.
The person who is prefering a public interest litigation should be a genuine person acting bonafide to vindicate the cause of justice but not for any personal gain or profit or with some ulterior political motive or other oblique considerations.The High court should not allow itself to be activised at the instance of such persons and should reject their applications at the threashold, whther it be in the form of a letter or even a petition.
In the instant case,Divine Retreat Centre,Muringoor, in Thrissur District, Kerala is aggreived by the suo motu process initiated by the order of a single judge of the Kerala High Court who initiated action on the basis of an anonymous letter.The present appeal preferred by the Centre is directed against that judgement.
The Supreme Court allowing the appeal said,’there is heavy duty cast upon the constitutional courts to protect themselves from the onslaught unleashed by unscrupulous litigants masquerading asd public interest litigants.The individual judges should not initiate action against any letter or petitions addressed to them individually and they should get the approval of the concerned chief justice of the court. before initiating any action on the letter or petition seeking public interest litigation.
The above judgement is a landmark judgement as it would prune unwanted and unscrupulous persons from misusing the PIL.
Leave Your Comments