The Bombay High Court, renowned for its pivotal role in upholding justice in India, has recently taken a firm stance against the rising tide of frivolous public interest litigations (PILs) inundating its chambers. Expressing exasperation at the burden imposed by these unnecessary cases, Acting Chief Justice Nitin Jamdar urged litigants to bring forth genuine causes that can foster tangible societal change. The court's endeavor to prioritize meaningful issues has sparked a crucial conversation about the purpose and integrity of PILs. A recent report regarding the same was published in the Free Press Journal.
A Call for Genuine Causes
In a recent hearing, Acting Chief Justice Nitin Jamdar made his frustration abundantly clear, urging petitioners to present legitimate causes that truly impact society. He emphasized that the court's ability to address other important matters was impeded by the influx of frivolous PILs. Bar and Bench reported that the court yearned for petitions that were driven by a sincere desire to champion public interest and rectify genuine wrongs.
Scrutinizing Motives
During the course of proceedings, the court scrutinized the motives behind certain PILs, particularly those filed by lawyers. The judges sought clarification from the petitioners, questioning their involvement and genuine interest in the cases they represented. This scrutiny aimed to ensure that the court's time and resources were devoted to addressing pressing matters with substantial public significance.
Preserving the Supreme Court's Credibility
In a separate incident in February 2023, the Bombay High Court robustly defended the credibility of the Supreme Court of India against attempts to erode public faith in the judiciary. The court dismissed a PIL filed by the Bombay Lawyers Association against Union Law Minister Kiren Rijiju and Vice President of India Jagdeep Dhankhar. The PIL sought to disqualify the two constitutional authorities, alleging that their critical remarks had shaken the public's trust in the Supreme Court and the Constitution of India. However, the bench, consisting of Acting Chief Justice SV Gangapurwala and Justice Sandeep Marne, rejected the plea and stressed that constitutional authorities cannot be removed based on such grounds.
Upholding the Constitution and Redefining PILs
In the detailed order released by the court, it reaffirmed the sanctity and supremacy of the Constitution of India. The court emphasized that all citizens are bound by the Constitution and expected to abide by its values. It underscored the importance of fair criticism of judicial decisions and the fundamental duty of every citizen to respect the majesty of the law. Furthermore, the court reminded litigants that PILs are intended for the protection of public interest and should focus on addressing genuine public grievances and injuries rather than serving self-promotional or publicity-oriented purposes.
Share
Tweet
