(Article written by Anjani Kumar)
The Union Home Ministry of India while filing a Suo–Moto notice in the Supreme Court on the reports published by a few news agencies like The Wire, The Scroll, The Hindustan Times, The Dainik Bhaskar as well as by few other independent online news databases on the increasing cases of attacks and atrocities made on the Christian community in the various parts of the country has said that these PILs, the basis on which these reports were filed were either fallacious or were projected wrongly. The ministry has also said that it has been seen that generally while filing PILs, such issues are raised which can fetch either such people or agencies mere publicity.
The top court said that such PILs were filed without doing much research by such people which based on either incomplete information or such people are incompetent in doing so. Furthermore, the ministry sources said that while probing into the alleged claims made by the petitioner, it has been found that most of the claims were fallacious and based on the basis of self –service as well as selected documents.
The Ministry said that it is an established truth that such PILs are filed in the interest of the general public , however , it has been seen that they are not in the interest of the mass public .
Earlier in the SP Ananda versus HD Devegoda case, the Apex Court has already made it clear that during the hearing on the Public Litigation Petitions, the petitioner is expected not to bow before the common human sentiments.
If we look into further such instances of such cases taking place, one such report comes from Jamnagar from the state of Gujrat where a petition was filed challenging the establishment of a zoo by the Greens Geological Rescue Centre (GZRRC) and while dismissing it the Apex Court said that the petitioners themselves are not the specialists of this field not specialists of this field, moreover , his reports were based on the reports of the newspaper which also does not look like a report prepared by a specialist of this field. If we look back, we find that while hearing a Public Litigation Report filed demanding from the top court to re-organise and to make it better the former Chief Justice of India DY Chandra- Chud asked the government not to interfere into the Public Interest Litigation cases nor it should challenge it. He further said that what is a very sorry state of things with our courts that they have started to hear even Public Interest Litigation cases with a negative point of view.
Bombay High Court on Monday fined a sum of 5 lakh on a petitioner for filing a fake Public Interest Litigation against a co-operative bank while accusing it of being involved in an act of money laundering. In this connection, a division bench of justices P.D Kode and BM Kanade heard a petition which was filed by agriculturist Parisa Desai and another seeking criminal action against Parswanath Co-operative Bank Limited along with its 14 directors In the petition it was alleged in the plea that bank’s management was conducting its affairs in a manner which was highly dangerous besides being prejudicial for the interest of its depositors and borrowers. In a further directive the advocates who are fighting the case said have that the bank has said that the bank has started recovery process against the brother of the petitioner and the PIL has been filed as counter measure.
