Janata Dal vs H.S. Chowdhary And Ors. on 28 August, 1992
8. The Apex Court further noticed certain observations of noted case of Janta Dal v. H.S. Choudhary . The relevant extract from these observations are:
Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 3 of 3 (0.18 seconds)Dattaraj Nathuji Thaware vs State Of Maharashtra & Ors on 14 December, 2004
7. The Apex Court in its various judgments deprecated the new emerging trend of filing Public Interest Litigation by unscrupulous persons for oblique motive and not for projection or redressal of the genuine public grievance. The latest judgment in the series is reported in Datta Raj Nathuji Thaware v. State of Maharashtra and Ors. . This is a case in which a member of legal profession filed a Public Interest Litigation after accepting money from somebody. The writ petition came to be dismissed by the High Court imposing cost of of Rs. 25,000/- upon the petitioner- lawyer . The Special Leave Petition filed before the Apex Court also came to be dismissed . While considering the necessity, object at the back of the Public Interest Litigation and its misuse by unscrupulous persons, the Apex Court observed:
Kazilhendup Dorji vs Central Bureau Of Investigation on 29 March, 1994
When there is material to show that a petition styled as a public interest litigation is nothing but a camouflage to foster personal disputes, the said petition is to be thrown out. Before we grapple with the issue involved in the present case, we feel it necessary to consider the issue regarding; public interest aspect. Public interest litigation which has now come to occupy an important field in the Administration of law should not be Publicity Interest Litigation or Private Interest Litigation or Politics Interest Litigation or the latest trend paise income litigation the High Court has found that the case at hand belongs to the last category. If not properly regulated and abuse averted, it becomes also a tool unscrupulous hands to release vendetta and wreak vengeance, as well. There must be a real and genuine public interest involved in the litigation and not merely an adventure of knight errant borne out of wishful thinking. It cannot also be invoked by a person or a body of persons to further his or there personal causes or satisfy his or there personal grudge and enmity. Courts of Justice should not be allowed to be polluted by unscrupulous litigants by resorting to the extra ordinary jurisdiction. A person acting bona fide and having sufficient interest in the proceeding or public interest litigation will alone have a locus standi and can approach the court to wipe out violation of fundamental rights and genuine infraction of statutory provisions, but not for personal gain on private profit or political motive or any oblique consideration. These aspects were highlighted by this Court in Janta Dal v. H.S. Choudhary and Kazi Lhendup Dorji v. CBI (1992) Suppp (2) SCC 116 : 1994 SCC (Cri) 873. A writ petitioner who comes to the court for relief in public interest must come not only with clean hands like any other writ petitioner but also with a clean heart, clean mind and clean objective.
1