SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2013 Supreme(J&K) 602

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT SRINAGAR
M.M. Kumar,Ali Mohammad Magrey, JJ.
B.A. Misri -Appellant
Versus
State Of J&K & Ors. -Resopndent
OWP (PIL) No. 01-2013 & IA No. 360-2013; connected with PIL Nos. 4-2013 & 12-2013
Decided On : 30-10-2013

Advocates Appeared:
B.A. Misri, Mian Tufail, M.I. Qadiri, Shah Amir, S.A. Makroo, Aijaz Ahmed Dar.

The parameters within which PIL can be resorted to and entertained by the court, emphasizing that it should be aimed at redressal of genuine public harm or public injury, and should not have any personal gain, private motive, or oblique motive behind filing the public interest litigation.

Headnote:

Public Interest Litigation - Use of Pepper Gas and Pellet Guns - Section 128 of the Code of Criminal Procedure - [SUMMARY OF ACTS AND SECTIONS REFERENCED: Section 128 of the Code of Criminal Procedure] - The court dismissed the petitions related to the use of pepper gas and pellet guns, stating that they were filed without empirical research and in a casual manner, based solely on newspaper reports without authentic evidence. The court emphasized that the Public Interest Litigation jurisdiction does not give the right to come to the court with bald statements unsupported by material particulars and documents. It also highlighted the parameters within which PIL can be resorted to and entertained by the court, emphasizing that it should be aimed at redressal of genuine public harm or public injury, and should not have any personal gain, private motive, or oblique motive behind filing the public interest litigation.

Fact of the Case:

The petitions were filed in public interest related to the use of pepper gas and pellet guns by security agencies in mob management. The petitioners alleged hazardous effects of the gases and claimed that the use of non-lethal munitions resulted in fatalities and injuries.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the petitions were filed without empirical research and in a casual manner, solely based on newspaper reports without authentic evidence. It concluded that the petitions were not maintainable and were filed for oblique and extraneous considerations.

Issues: The issues revolved around the use of pepper gas and pellet guns by security agencies, the authenticity of the claims made in the petitions, and the maintainability of the petitions under the Public Interest Litigation jurisdiction.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that the Public Interest Litigation jurisdiction does not give the right to come to the court with bald statements unsupported by material particulars and documents. It also highlighted the parameters within which PIL can be resorted to and entertained by the court, emphasizing that it should be aimed at redressal of genuine public harm or public injury, and should not have any personal gain, private motive, or oblique motive behind filing the public interest litigation.

Final Decision: The court dismissed the petitions related to the use of pepper gas and pellet guns, stating that they were filed without empirical research and in a casual manner, based solely on newspaper reports without authentic evidence. It also declined the prayer made by the petitioners and did not impose any costs on them, but observed that they should remain careful in the future and uphold the highest tradition of the legal profession.

M.M. Kumar, C.J.

1. These three writ petitions, professedly filed in public interest by three different persons relate to more or less the same subject matter. Two of them have been filed by two Advocates. In the first two writ petitions, the petitioners have sought a direction to the respondents / security agencies not to use pepper gas in mob management, whereas in the third writ petition the petitioner has also sought mandamus for non-use of pellet guns.

2. OWP no. 01/2013 is primarily filed on the ground that the police is rampantly using pepper gas and tear gas to disperse mobs which has far reaching consequences on non-combatants, bystanders and the dwellers of the area. It is averred that the gases are of hazardous nature which can induce or aggravate respiratory diseases, pulmonary edema, acute elevation in blood pressure associated with risk of stroke and heart attack. It is alleged that the use of gases has already claimed several lives and that the same infuse multifarious disorders, diseases and uneasiness especially among the children and aged. Writ petition, OWP no. 04/2013, has been filed on almost identical assertions. In both these petitions, the claims put forth by the petitioners is solely based on newspaper reports which has not been substantiated in material particulars by any authentic evidence.

3. In the third petition, i.e., OWP no. 12/2013, the grievance projected is against use of Pellet Guns and marble shots besides the use of pepper gas. It is alleged that the deadly pellet guns and marble shots are being used by the Police and CRPF personnel directly targeting the vital parts viz. eyes, chest, head, back, abdomen etc. in order to disperse mobs. The contention raised is that use of pellet guns and marble shots tantamount to using excessive force which is not permissible under Section 128 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner has also appended with the writ petition two self styled statements containing the names of 32 persons who are alleged to have been fatally injured by the use of excessive force and use of either pepper gas, pellet guns or marble shots at different places in the Valley in the last few years. Apart from that, one Hajira Begum wife of Habibullah Bhat of Rehbab Sahab, Aali Kadal aged 50 years, shown at serial no.4 of the first list (annexure A) is alleged to have died because of inhaling of pepper gas.

4. In response to notice of motion having been issued the respondent-State filed a detailed reply in OWP no.0l/2013 which was also adopted as reply in OWP no.04/2013 as well as OWP no.12/2013 as per the statement made by learned Advocate General which is reflected in the order dated 11.07.2013. The respondent -UOI filed a separate reply in OWP no.12/2013. The respondent-state also filed a supplementary affidavit in response to OWP no. 12/2013.

5. The respondent-state in their reply have stated that the instant petition does not serve any public interest, but seems to be an attempt by the petitioner to gain publicity over a very sensitive issue. It is averred that the J&K Police stands committed to protect and preserve the life and property of the people and at the same time maintain normalcy and peace in the State so that no hardship / disturbance is caused to the people. The actions taken to achieve this goal are based solely on good faith and are backed by the mandate of law. It is stated that over the past few years the State in general and Kashmir Valley in particular has witnessed sporadic incidents where unruly mobs of stone pelters have attempted to disturb the law and order thereby threatening the peace and normalcy in the State. By the passage of time, the size and strength of these unruly mobs have also been generally increasing and these chronic stone pelters have also changed their modus operandi. They attack the police personnel deployed for maintaining law and order from all directions with stones, with intention to kill them as well as with intention to cause da































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top