IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SANJAYA KUMAR MISHRA, ANANDA SEN, JJ.
Shani Kant alias Mantu Soni, S/o Shri Rajesh Soni – Appellant
Versus
The Union of India – Respondent
W.P.(PIL) No. 1248 of 2022
Decided on : 04-10-2023
Public Interest Litigation - Alleged Scam of Rs. 2000-3000 crores - Jharkhand High Court (Public Interest Litigation) Rules, 2010 - Rule 5 - T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad Vs. Union Of India & Ors., (2006) 5 SCC 28 - Holicow Pictures Pvt. Ltd Vs. Prem Chandra Mishra & Ors, (2007) 14 SCC 281 - The court found that the petitioners lacked credentials to maintain the Public Interest Litigation due to suppression of material facts and personal grievances. The court dismissed the petition and imposed a cost of Rs.1,00,000/- on petitioner No.1 for the suppression of material facts.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners filed a Public Interest Litigation seeking investigation and action against alleged scam of Rs. 2000-3000 crores. The court found that the petitioners lacked credentials to maintain the Public Interest Litigation due to suppression of material facts and personal grievances.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioners lacked credentials to maintain the Public Interest Litigation due to suppression of material facts and personal grievances.
Issues: Suppression of material facts, lack of credentials of the petitioners to maintain the Public Interest Litigation.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of proper credentials for maintaining a Public Interest Litigation and highlighted the need to act bona fide in public interest litigations. It also cited the Jharkhand High Court (Public Interest Litigation) Rules, 2010 and relevant Supreme Court judgments to support its decision.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the Public Interest Litigation and imposed a cost of Rs.1,00,000/- on petitioner No.1 for the suppression of material facts.
ORDER :
1) By filing this Public Interest Litigation, the petitioners have prayed to issue a direction to the Secretary, Department of Revenue, Registration and Land Reforms (Respondent No. 7), to submit a complete and exact report of the Special Investigation Team (in short ‘SIT’) indicating alleged scam of Rs. 2000 – 3000/- cores along with its recommendations before this Court. The petitioners further have prayed to issue a direction to the respondents concerned to comply with the recommendations made by the SIT within a prescribed period along with a direction for initiation of criminal and/or other actions against the Officers/employees of NTPC, State Government and other persons including middlemen; or, to issue direction to the Central Bureau of Investigation (‘CBI’ in short), to conduct investigation and submit its report within a period of three months as regards the illegality committed in disbursement of the compensation by making false/ fabricated documents for land settlement and manifold other illegalities in connection with the land acquisition for mining of coal by the NTPC for its projects and other Centrally sponsored projects of other agencies under the Hazaribagh district in the State of Jharkhand and leading to an alleged whopping scam of Rs. 2000-3000 crores.
2) The petitioners have not filed the Public Interest Litigation strictly in accordance of the rules of the Jharkhand High Court (Public Interest Litigation) Rules, 2010. There is non-compliance of the specific provisions of Rule 5 in the sense there has been no averment in paragraph 3 of the Public Interest Litigation regarding the credentials of the petitioners. In paragraph 3, it has been stated that the petitioners are citizens of the India and petitioner No.1 happens to be a freelance reporter in the print media as well as a RTI Activist. He is actively related in social work and public welfare. He has quoted his Aadhar Number. Petitioner No. 2 is stated to be an Advocate by profession and practices in Hazaribag Civil Court and he has also associated himself with Karanpura Bachao Sangarsh Samiti, which is stated to be raising and voicing the issues of the illegal land acquisition/ dispossession of local people, illegality in the disbursement of compensation for acquired land in Hazaribagh District. They further state that there is no ulterior motive/ malice/ political motive/ profit motive involved in filing of the instant petition. It is stated by the petitioners that the instant matter is concerned with public at large and related to wastage of public money/embezzlement, as such, they are entitled to file instant petition for enforcement of legal and constitutional right of the public at large and the writ petition has been filed with the absolute intention of service the public interest.
3) In course of hearing on the previous date, the petitioner was granted the time to file a supplementary affidavit. A supplementary affidavit was filed on 27.09.2023 and another supplementary affidavit was filed on 30.09.2023. In the affidavit filed on 27.09.2023, petitioner No.1 has made many allegations against the Senior Advocate Mr. Ajit Kumar. Mr. Ajit Kumar, in course of hearing, has made an attempt to defend and explained the allegations made against him, however, we are not concerned with the character or the past history of the Senior Advocate appearing for any of the parties in the Public Interest Litigation. Our main concerned is regarding the credentials of the petitioners.
4) In course of hearing, it also transpires from the counter affidavit and supplementary affidavits filed by the respondents that the petitioner no. 1 has been involved in six criminal cases. In fact, in one criminal case he has been convicted and the appeal is pending before this Court. It is also not disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is arrayed an accused in two cases where the informants happen to be the employees of the NTPC. It is also sub
Proper credentials and acting bona fide are essential for maintaining a Public Interest Litigation.
Point of Law : Courts must do justice by promotion of good faith, and prevent law from crafty invasions. Courts must maintain the social balance by interfering where necessary for the sake of justice....
The court emphasized the need for petitioners in public interest litigation to come with clean hands and be above suspicion, and laid down parameters to prevent misuse of public interest litigation.
Public Interest Litigation must meet strict bona fides and credential requirements to prevent misuse for personal gain.
(1) Public Interest Litigations – What is of crucial significance in a Public Interest Litigation is bona fide of petitioner who files PIL – It is an extremely relevant consideration and must be exam....
The court emphasized the necessity for petitioners in Public Interest Litigations to disclose their credentials to establish genuine public interest and discourage frivolous filings.
Public Interest Litigations must demonstrate genuine public interest, and allegations must be substantiated with relevant evidence; vague and unsupported claims cannot warrant judicial intervention.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.