Back
2007 Supreme(Bom) 1143
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION
SWATANTER KUMAR, C.J., & SMT RANJANA DESAI , J .
Dr M Furquan — Petitioner
Versus
Jet Airways India Ltd.— Respondents
PIL Writ Petition No. 4 of 2007
with
Criminal Application No. 1 of 2007
Decided on 21 August 2007
Mr. Samji Joseph for K T Thomas for the petitioner in the PIL and for respondent no.1 in the criminal application No.1 of 2007.
Mr Harish Salve and Mr. Janak Dwarkadas senior advocates with
Mr. Amit Desai, Mr. R.J Gagrat, Ms Meenakshi Grover, Ms Sheetal Sabnis, Ms S Vidya and Mr V.N.Kulkarni i/b Gagrats for respondent
No.1 in Cri PIL No. 4 of 2007 and Cri Appln No.l/2007 Mr B.A.Desai, Addl. Solicitor General with Ms Usha Kejariwal APP for respondent Nos. 2 to 7 in Cri PIL
Ms Usha Kejariwal APP for State for respondent Nos.8 to 10
Headnote:Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 226-Public Interest Litigation-Nexus between Dawood Ibrahim, Underworld Don and Chairman of Jet Airways Ltd.-Money of Don is used in company plead-CBI inquiry demanded-No proof of nexus etc. petition dismissed.
Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 226 - Public Interest Litigation - Caution while exercising such weapon - Held - Courts have to be case full while entertain of such writ petitions.
Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 226 - Public Interest Litigation - Nexus between Dawood Ibrahim, Underworld Don and Chairman of Jet Airways Ltd. - Money of Don is used in company plead - CBI inquiry demanded - No proof of nexus etc. - Held petition dismissed.
Constitution of India - Article 226 - Public Interest Litigation (PIL) - Maintainability of - Petition involving question of public interest must be directly relatable to actual interest of public at large - To be a substantial interest - Courts have to take great care - Basic ingredients and essentials laid down by Apex Court not satisfied by petitioner - Petition deserves to be dismissed. - The Courts while exercising jurisdiction and deciding a public interest litigation have to take great care, primarily for the reason that this wide jurisdiction should not become a source of abuse of process of law by a disgruntled litigant. The Courts have also held that no efforts should be spared in fostering and developing the laudable concept of PIL and extending its long arm of sympathy to the poor, the ignorant, the oppressed and the needy whose fundamental rights are infringed and violated and whose grievances go unnoticed. It has to be a genuine litigation, unmotivated and imposes an obligation upon a litigant to come to the Court with true facts and clean hands. Public interest litigations result in taking large Court’s time, which could not be used by the Court for the benefit of common litigant. Thus it is more imperative that petitions which are bona fide and further the public cause alone should be entertained in this category.
It is also true that a petition involving the question of public interest must be directly relatable to actual interest of the public at large, which has to be a substantial interest. It is not the title of the petition which would satisfy the ingredients of public interest litigation but it is the substance of the petition, which would be the determinative factor.
The petitioner is stated to be the editor of a leading fortnightly Urdu newspaper by name “Sach Bilkul Sach”, which according to him, has wide circulation and is intended to bring to light of the general public various problems faced by downtrodden and to expose the misdeeds of various persons. The present petition has been filed by him to show the nexus between the underworld Mr. Dawood Ibrahim Kaskar and the Chairman of Jet Airways (India) Limited, as huge investments were received illegally and utilized to accrue assets for the company. It is averred in the petition that huge tainted Indian money is laundered and recycled into business in India, which is generated as a result of smuggling and extortion and similar illegal practices. There was confirmed information of intermittent contact between Naresh Goyal and underworld dons and this requires to be looked into by CBI as it affects the security of the country. There are averments in the petition that the security clearance given to the new Board of Directors of Jet Airways (India) Limited was in absence of clear view from the Civil Aviation Ministry and even the Chairman of Jet Airways did not have security clearance, which is mandatory as per the Rules. The deal of purchase of Sahara Airlines, according to the petitioner, would have costed respondent No.1 company an amount of Rs.2,500 crores approximately, while they had only raised, as per the averments made in the PIL Petition No.5 of 2006, Rs 1600 crores and this amount was to be used for repayment of debt and the remaining was to be used for further development. After raising money from public issue, the remaining money was acquired out of unholy nexus with the underworld. Problem had also arisen at the time of induction of new Directors into the company as security clearances were needed and the Intelligence Bureau had asked the Ministry of Home Affairs to directly correspond with the Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) and secure their inputs on the affairs of the company. While relying upon certain other newspaper report, particularly of 22nd September 2006, it is averred that an employee of respondent No.1 was arrested for smuggling gold. The petitioner had earlier filed PIL No.5 of 2006 in this Court which was dismissed vide order dated 27th September 2006, which reads as under: “By means of this Public Interest Litigation , the petitioner prays for direction for entrustment of the investigation of the case against respondent No. 7 to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).
2. The petitioner has alleged that the respondent No.7 has unholy nexus with the underworld don Dwood Ibrahim and the said nexus is likely to hamper the national security. According to the petitioner, in the activities in the guise of Jet Airways, the respondent No.7 has bee able to procure illegal funding.
3. The investigating machinery sets into motion only after the registration of the First Information Report or the complaint of the commission of crime is made as per the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code.
4.We asked the counsel for the petitioner as to whether any crime has been registered against the respondent No.7 necessitating investigation. His answer was that the petitioner had made complaint to the Director of CBI. We are afraid, such complaint is no complaint under the Code of Criminal Procedure regarding commission of crime. Since no crime has been registered against the respondent No.7 nor any complaint under the Code of Criminal Procedure of commission of crime duly lodged wherein the respondent No.7 is alleged to be involved, in our view, there is no question of directing CBI to investigate into the aspects alleged in the writ petition. How can there be any investigation when there is no crime registered against respondent No.7. Criminal Writ Petition is misconceived and is liable to be dismissed and is dismissed accordingly”. 2. According to the petitioner, he had earlier sent a l
