Judgment

P. N. BHAGWATI, C.J.I. :- This writ petition has been filed by the Bihar Legal Support Society which is a registered Society having as its main aim and objective provision of legal support to the poor and disadvantaged sections of the community with a view to assisting them to fight for their constitutional and legal rights through the process of law. The occasion for filing the writ petition is set out in para 2 where it has been stated that a Bench of this Court sat late at night on 5-9-1986 for considering the bail application of Shri Lalit Mohan Thapar and Shri Shyam Sunder Lal and that the same anxiety which was shown by this Court in taking up the bail application of these two gentlemen must "permeate the attitude and inclination of this Honble Court in all matters where questions relating to the liberty of citizens, high or low, arise" and that the bail applications of "small men" must receive the same importance as the bail applications of "big industrialists". The petitioner, therefore, prays that special leave petitions against orders refusing bail or anticipatory bail should be taken up by this Court immediately in the same manner in which the special leave petition of these two "big industrialists" was taken up by the Court.

2. Now, we may point out that so far as this Court is concerned. the special leave petitions of "small men" are as much entitled to consideration as special leave petitions of "big industrialists". In fact, this Court has always regarded the poor and the disadvantaged as entitled to preferential consideration than the rich and the affluent, the businessmen and the industrialists. The reason is that the weaker sections of Indian humanity have been deprived of justice for long, long years : they have had no access to justice on account of their poverty, ignorance and illiteracy. They are not aware of the rights and benefits conferred upon them by the Constitution and the law. On account of their socially and economically disadvantaged position they lack the capacity to assert their rights and they do not have the material resources with which to enforce their social and economic entitlements and combat exploitation and injustice. The majority of the people of our country are subjected to this denial of access to justice and overtaken by despair and helplessness, they continue to remain victims of an exploitative society where economic power is concentrated in the hands of a few and it is used for perpetuation of domination over large masses of human beings. This Court has always. therefore, regarded it as its duty to come to the rescue of those deprived and vulnerable sections of Indian humanity in order to help them realise their economic and social entitlements and to bring to an end their oppression and exploitation. The strategy of public interest litigation has been evolved by this Court with a view to bringing justice within the easy reach of the poor and the disadvantaged sections of the community. This Court has always shown the greatest concern and anxiety for the welfare of the large masses of people in the country who are living a life of want and destitution, misery and suffering and has become a symbol of the hopes and aspirations of millions of people in the country. It is, therefore. not correct to say that this Court is not giving to the "small men" the same treatment as it is giving to the "big industrialists". In fact, the concern shown to the poor and the disadvantaged is much greater than that shown to the rich and the well-to-do because the latter can on account of their dominant social and economic position and large material resources, resist aggression on their rights where the poor and the deprived just do not have the capacity or the will to resist and fight.

3. The question whether special leave petitions against refusal of bail or anticipatory bail should be listed immediately or not is a question within the administrative jurisdiction of the Chief Justice and we