Open Access Research Article
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION: TOOL OF ABUSE OR JUSTICE (By-Ratnesh Sahu)
Published Paper
Article Details
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION: TOOL OF ABUSE OR JUSTICE
Authored By-Ratnesh Sahu
ICFAI University, Dehradun
Abstract
This research paper is regarding the
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION: TOOL OF ABUSE OR JUSTICE. Following the socialist
model, and later, is aimed at speeding up and improving social and economic
transformation that continued in the late 80’s, the Supreme Court of India was
established the role of activist since the inception of PIL, made the process
more complex and easier completely changed the status of India’s legal system.
Trial of public interest, arising from the dire need to preserve and the rights
of people who are lagging behind of the public, you have seen ongoing
violations from the tool of use to the harassment bulletin. Looking at its
genesis, the authors read of its birth in the case of Hussainara Khatoon.
Research paper, therefore, with a complete understanding of The Public Interest
Trial Act in India, which is consistent with its operation as well increasing,
seeks to reflect and analyze its position and position in the modern time, in
essence of the last initiation and its revealed features and normal. They
conclude the writes with hope, hope and trust in the title, the flag bearer
justice and the masses, while designing methods and recommendations for defense
and law enforcement Court of Public Interest.
Introduction:-
“We would, therefore, hold that any
member of the public having sufficient interest can
Maintain an action for judicial redress for
public injury arising from breach of public duty or from violation of some
provision of the Constitution or the law and seek enforcement of such public
duty and observance of such constitutional or legal provision. This is
absolutely essential for maintaining the rule of law, furthering the cause of
justice and accelerating the pace of realization of the constitutional
objective.”
- Justice P.N. Bhagwati[1]
Public Interest Litigation means a
legal action initiated in a court for enforcement of public interest. Public
Interest Litigation is designed to provide legal representation to those
unrepresented groups or any person whose rights are infringed and due to lack
of awareness or economically disadvantages are they unable to approach the
court for remedies. Pursuant to Article 32 of the Constitution of India, the
right to appeal to the Supreme Court by appropriate procedures for enforcing
the rights granted by this section is confident. Generally, only the victim has
the right to seek redress under Article 32.
How Was Public Interest Litigation
Enforced In India And Causes:-
The Public Interest Litigation is a
product of the judicial activism role of the Supreme Court. It was introduced
in the early 1980s. In 1981 Justice P. N. Bhagwati, S. P. Gupta v. The Union of India[2],
expressed the concept of PIL as follows, When a legal offense or legal injury
is caused to an individual or a specified class of persons as a result of a
violation of any constitutional or legal right. Imposed for violation of any
constitutional or legal provision or without legal authority or any other
lawlessness or legal injury or liability is threatened and the person or group
of persons determined by poverty, incapacity or disability or social or
economic disability. can go to court for relief, any member of the public may
file a petition for appropriate guidance, order or writing in the Supreme Court
under Section 226 and in the event of a violation of the fundamental rights of
such persons or class of persons, in the case. a court
under Section 32 seeking legal
redress for a legal error or legal damages caused to that person or a specified
class of persons.
The law of locus stand is relaxed and
a person who is honest and has a keen interest in conducting a Public Interest
Court will be alone and may go to court to eliminate violations of fundamental
rights and real violations of legal provisions, but not for personal gain or
personal gain or political motives and any improper consideration.
Public Interest litigation serves as
an important tool for social change. It works for the well-being of all
sections of society. It is the sword of every man used for justice. The
introduction of this official tool proved to be beneficial in a developing
country like India. PIL has been used as a strategy to combat the atrocities
that exist in society. It is an institutional program that focuses on the
well-being of people in need in the community. In case of Bandhua Mukti Morcha vs. Union of India & others[3],
Supreme Court issued an order for the release of the imprisoned workers. In the
case of Murli S. Dogra v. Union of India[4],
Supreme Court banned smoking in public places. In the landmark decision of
Delhi Domestic Working Women's Forum v.
Union of India[5],
Supreme Court issued guidelines for rehabilitation and compensation for rape of
working women. In the case of Vishaka
and others v. State of Rajasthan[6],
Supreme Court has set comprehensive guidelines for preventing sexual harassment
of working women in the workplace.
Hussainara Khatoon v. State of Bihar[7]
The first reported PIL was by
Hussainara khatoon v. State of Bihar, which led to the release of more than
40,000 prisoners were converted and made a landmark decision the right to
speedy trail. The judiciary, in the emerging stages of the PIL, is very focused
prisons’ rights, and conditions under which they live. This was facilitated by
books, texts, postcards, applications from citizens with a community spirit
including lawyers, journalists in between others, who wanted to bring to the
courts the suffering of billions of trials living under harsh conditions in
the country’s prisons. The Court will
change facts collected from citizens in the form of cards, letters, media
reports, applications, etc., in a petition under Section 32 until the trial of
Hussinara khatoon in 1979, the Indian justice system was accessible only those
with locus standi, i.e. people affected personally. For the first time, the
court allowed the lawyer to pursue a case in which he had no interest, and
since then PILs have become an integral part of Indian law. PILs have become a
channel ensuring justice for the poor affected by the program. In the
Hussainara khatoon, the Supreme Court focused on Bihar subordinate cases. Who
has been arrested while awaiting trail longer than the maximum sentence by
their charges. The Court made the right to a speedy trail a priority for the
case, too passed an order for the release of nearly 40,000 detainees otherwise
the maximum time for their cases. The right to a fair trial is now recognized
as a fundamental right of every defendant. It’s a feature of the administration
of justice. It is the constitutional obligation of the state to ensure security
Article21, and the right to a fair trial immediately falls short of its
purpose. The Court ruled that the State you will not deny the right to a speedy
trial of the respondent on the grounds that the state does not have enough
financial services, in particular Justice Bhagwati said:-
“The State cannot avoid it
constitutional obligation to prosecute immediately accused to admitting
financial or administrative incompetence. The State is under the Constitution
the authority to ensure a speedy trial and anything required for this purpose
must be done State. It is
Also the constitutional obligation of
this Court as the custodian of the case, to enforce the defendant’s fundamental
right to a speedy trial by issuing necessary directives to the State which
include. Take positive steps, such as adding and strengthening investigative
equipment, establishing new Courts, building new Court houses, providing
additional staff and operation resources in the courts, the appointment of
additional judges and other measures taken to ensure expedition case.”
This section above shows the
importance and role of Public Interest Litigation in Public and state action.
Supported by the Justice Department, it aimed to provide basic access to
justice for the oppressed and those affected by the system, as in the case. The
Court, thereafter, recommended to the state and the Federal Government, a legal
service a system that guarantee free legal services, a bank with a State
obligation under Article 39A emphasizing the importance of free legal service
as part of ‘eligibility, correct and ‘correct’ procedure. This was the birth of
the Public Interest Litigation concept, which has already played an important
role as a facilitator, as a tool and platform for achieving and achieving
justice for many different
communities.
In words by Pushpa kapila Hingorani, the lawyer who initiated the Public Interest Litigation
revolution, “The success of the Khatoon case was so great that the Supreme
Court ruled in the 1980’s opened a new section in the Registry provided for
Public Interest Litigation. The police was used to sifting through endless
objects bombing of letters or requests from citizens every day and choosing the
right one brought to Court.” Courts have relaxed the flow of court proceedings.
Public Interest Litigation become part of a charitable organization, and help
bring justice to many poor people once and for all vulnerable citizens.
In the case of Lalit Valecha v. Union of India[8]
The Public Interest litigation was
filed in the Delhi High Court to direct news and TV channels to adhere to the
Code of Ethics and Law while reporting critical content on the deaths and
suffering of many people. Pray to stop the spread of evil by preventing media
outlets from broadcasting the news. The petition also provided the reason that
the freedom of speech and expression under Article 19 is not absolute. The list
of complaints was dismissed by the bench, which said that reporting the death
toll was not bad news.
In the case of Rajeev Suri v. Delhi Development Authority[9]
The appeal was filed with the Delhi
High Court, but the Supreme Court appealed the decision. The petition
challenged the existence of a Central Vista project and how approval had been
obtained in terms of environment, heritage, and land use issues. It also called
the issue extremely important to the political process.
The Supreme Court appealed and called
this reckless use of the concept of Public Interest Litigation. It also
emphasized the intention of the Public Interest Litigation by saying that the
Public Interest Litigation was not intended to give the judiciary supreme
authority over the day-to-day administration but to open the doors of the
constitutional courts to those people who faced injustice and to protect their
fundamental right.
Laws Related To Public Interest
Litigation Abuse:-
Claims of Public Interest may be
lodged in the High Court and in the High Courts in the exercise of their
jurisdiction under Article 32 and Article 226.
Ø Article 32 deals with the right of
citizens to approach the Supreme Court against infringement of the rights
conferred on Part III of the constitution, which may issue mandates, habeas
corpus, certiorari, and quo-warranto as applicable in the case.
Ø Section 226 empowers the high courts
to issue subordinate documents in cases of human rights violations mentioned in
Part III of the Constitution.
Unexpected increase in high court
activity: Public Interest litigation disrupt the normal functioning of the
court leading to an increase in the number of pending cases in both the Supreme
Court and the High Courts, resulting in overcrowding the legal system.
Process misuse: Public Interest Litigation is
most misused when they have turned to litigation for private interests. It has
led to the filing of irrational and violent complaints, which have been filed
in court. Conflicts and conflicts with other spheres of government: A strong
criticism of Public Interest Litigation is that through this forum it enters
the realm of the Legislature and the Legislatures. Over the years, the aspect
of PIL's social action has been refined and obscured by some form of
"public court action" in the courts. In this type of case, court
intervention is not required to enforce the rights of disadvantaged or poor
people in the community, but to correct the actions or omissions of the
executive or government officials or government departments or civil society.
Possible Reasons Why People Misuse
Or Abuse The Concept Of Public Interest Litigation:-
A MODE OF ABUSE: - Many people have begun to use the Public Interest Litigation as a tool to
register false abuse cases. This has become easier as it is cheaper to file a
Public Interest Litigation, compared to a private trial. The ease of having a
locus stand has led people to place their private interests as public
interests. People have begun to abuse Public Interest Litigation in order to
solve personal problems and pursue political or business interests. The court
warned that Public Interest Litigation should be considered a "public
interest case" and not a "private interest case".
THE PROFESSIONAL PUBLIC INTEREST
LITIGATION STORES: - The
attorney general, Tushar Mehta, called the PILs, "professional PILs
stores" and demanded that they be demolished. He said in order to get
answers to the illegal Public Interest Litigation, government officials end up
wasting their valuable time and this could be dangerous for the country. One
day, he also referred to himself as "applications that generate
employment" in which the court should not waste time.
IN SOME CASES MISUSE OF PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION: - Public interest litigation is a
powerful tool for law enforcement and accountability and transparency within
the governing body. An important part of Public Interest Litigation real
complaint is that the person dismissing the court has no personal interest in
the outcome of the trial, other than appearing in court.
“Unfortunately, of late, it has been
noticed that such an important jurisdiction
Which has been carefully carved out,
created and nurtured with great care and
Caution by the courts, is being
blatantly abused by filing some petitions with
Oblique motives. We think time has
come when genuine and bona fide public
Interest litigation must be
encouraged whereas frivolous public interest litigation
should be discouraged.”
- Justice Dalveer Bhandari[10]
In Some Case Letters Or Complaints
That Fall Under The Following Categries Alone Shall Be Deemed To Be The
Tribunal:-
Ø Imprisoned Personnel Issues
Ø Neglected Children
Ø Non-payment of minimum wage to
employees and exploitation of temporary employees and grievance redundancies.
Ø Claims for prisons complaining of
abuse and seeking release after 14 years in prison, death in prison, transfer,
release on personal bond, immediate trial FN.
Ø Complaints involving the police for
refusal to register a case, police harassment and death in police custody.
Ø Applications that include violence
against women, especially bride abuse, bribery, rape, murder, kidnapping and
more.
Ø Complaints involving complaints of
harassment or harassment of citizens through citizens or by police from members
of the Seduced Caste and Organized Nations and classes of economically
disadvantaged persons.
Ø Applications including pollution,
environmental disturbances, drugs, food resistance, heritage conservation,
archeology, forestry, wildlife and other public affairs.
Ø Demand requests – victims
Ø Family pension
All letters or applications found in
the Public Interest Litigation Cell will be considered in advance and only
those appeals as set out in the aforementioned categories shall be made before
the Judge regarding the appointment of the Honorable Chief Justice of India to
direct thereafter. a case to be filed before the appropriate bench.
The following are matters that fall
under these categories will not be considered as a Public Interest Court and
may not be referred back to the plaintiffs or placed in Public Interest
Litigation custody, as the case may be:
Ø Landlord news
Ø Service issues and those related to
Pensions and Withdrawal Fees
Ø Complaints against Central / Regional
Government Departments and local authorities other than those related to the
above
Ø Access to the clinic and to others
Ø Early appeals to the High Courts and
the Low Courts
Remark Of Hon’ble Judges And
Supreme Court On Public Interest Litigation:-
CHIEF JUSTICE NV RAMANA:-
“He expressed concern frivolous
litigations in court and said the concept of Public Interest Litigation has now
turned into Personal Interest Litigation and is at times being misused to stall
projects or put pressure on public authorities.”
Ø Supreme Court has warned that the
court will have the power to set exemplary compensation for parties abusing
Public Interest Litigation. In addition, the party bringing Public Interest
Litigation to court must establish a case before the court, before the court
can take the case to proceed.
Ø The court also started establishing
Audit Committees comprising of community-based lawyers, social workers etc. to
consider the Public Interest Litigation filed and to submit a report to the
court stating the suitability of the case if there is anything that saves
valuable court time. In this case, the court has been assisting Amicus Curiae
(a friend of the court). The Supreme Court also warned the high courts to be
cautious while taking the PIL that it should not interfere in management policy
matters. The High Court has made guidelines outlining the process and matters,
which may be accepted as a Public Interest Litigation.
Many times, lawyers, and more
recently, law students have tried to use Public Interest Litigation for
publicity. The court on various occasions has called these "public
issues". The court emphasized how such requests instead of fulfilling the
purpose of the Public Interest Litigation harm the community. Not to be outdone
by quoting Cunningham, India's Public Interest Litigation could be Phoenix: a
new art from the ashes of the old system.
The Public Interest Litigation
represents the first attempt by a growing legitimate country to rebel against
official imperialism that has been going on for centuries. It contradicts the
view
that the more western law, the better
off economic and social development the law produced in developing countries,
including India, the development of underdeveloped men.
The transition from legal
jurisdiction to legal jurisdiction resulted in frustration with the legal
system. In India, however instead of seeking to change the way justice was
distributed it removed the official system itself through the Public Interest Litigation.
The change as we have seen, is great and orderly. It has greatly changed the
role of the law so that the court can bring justice by reaching out to the
common man.
Conclusion:-
“This question is of immense
importance in a country like India where access to justice being restricted by
social and economic constraints, it is necessary to democratise judicial
remedies, remove technical barriers against easy accessibility to justice and
promote Public Interest Litigation so that the large masses of people belonging
to the deprived and exploited sections of humanity may be able to realise and
enjoy the socio-economic rights granted to them and these rights may become
meaningful for them instead of remaining mere empty hopes.”
It is humbly submitted that Public
Interest Litigation is in the testing phase. Many shortcomings in handling case
types may emerge. But these shortcomings can be eliminated by establishing
better strategies. In fact, the Public Interest Litigation is developing a new
state account for constitutional and legal violations that adversely affect the
interests of vulnerable sections of society. We can conclude with the hope once
expressed by Justice Krishna Iyer, the Justice Department receives its highest
bonus when its orders wipe away the tears from other eyes.
Public Interest Litigation additionally
empower civil society to play good role in spreading awareness concerning human
rights , in raising voice to the marginalized sections of the society, and in
granting their support in the deciding process.
Public Interest Litigation is
therefore a way to help the poor get justice. The introduction of this official
tool proved to be beneficial in a developing country like India. Public
Interest
Litigation has been used as a
strategy to combat the atrocities that exist in society. It is not fair to
conclude by quoting Cunningham, "Indian Public Interest Litigation may be
Phoenix: a new art from the ashes of the old system." The great power of
the judiciary must be used to benefit the community and at all times to have
the public interest in serving the people. To prevent absurd cases with proper
entry testing and immediate dismissal is the key solution. The justice system
cannot lack integrity beyond the view that its order can be undermined without
punishment. This court should refrain from passing orders that could not be
enforced, no matter what the fundamental right and good reason was. It is
useless to issue high profile mandamus or an announcement that can only remain
on paper. Although the Supreme Court usually issues immediate exemption orders,
it is not uncommon for a final decision to be made, and in many cases, the
follow-up is worse. Courts, therefore, need to keep a check on the litigation
and confirm the genuine interest of the applicant and the nature of the cause
of the action, in order to avoid unnecessary litigation. Offensive and brutal
offenses should be identified and beaten so that PIL targets are not violated.
The founding fathers of our country thought of justice as “the foundation of
rights and justice.” The tools for reviewing justice, activism and community
action through PIL are tools for achieving full independence of the judiciary
and appropriate job creation.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Article Information
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION: TOOL OF ABUSE OR JUSTICE (By-Ratnesh Sahu)
Author Name: Ratnesh Sahu
Title: PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION: TOOL OF ABUSE OR JUSTICE
Email Id: ratneshsahu002@gmail.com
- Journal IJLRA
- ISSN 2582-6433
- Published 2022/07/05
About Journal
International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis
- Abbreviation IJLRA
- ISSN 2582-6433
- Access Open Access
- License CC 4.0
All research articles published in International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis are open access and available to read, download and share, subject to proper citation of the original work.
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis.