The Delhi High Court in a recent judgment dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) while emphasizing the importance of approaching the Court with clean hands and not using PILs for personal gain.
Brief Facts of the Case:
Ms. Sabiha Parveen, the petitioner, had filed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking action against illegal and unauthorised construction. The petitioner asserted in her affidavit that she had no personal interest in the matter, emphasising the public interest aspect of her petition.
However, it came to light that the petitioner and one of the respondents, who was the owner of the property in question, were first cousins. The respondent alleged that a family dispute existed, and the petitioner had been demanding Rs.25 lakhs from him. This familial relationship had not been disclosed by the petitioner in her initial filings.
Contentions of the Parties:
The primary contention of the petitioner was that her PIL was motivated by public interest and not guided by any personal gain. The petitioner maintained that the construction in question was illegal and unauthorised, emphasising the need for government authorities to take action.
On the other hand, the respondent argued that the petitioner had concealed her familial ties with him and had a personal interest in the matter, making the PIL an attempt to settle a family dispute. He highlighted the fact that the petitioner had been demanding a substantial sum of money from him.
Observations by the Court:
Citing its earlier judgment in New Rise Foundation Reg. Charitable Trust v. Municipal Corporation Delhi and Ors. (W.P. (C) 11285/2022), the court highlighted that a person who does not approach the court with clean hands and suppresses material facts is not entitled to any relief. In this previous case, a PIL seeking the demolition of a property was dismissed with a cost of Rs.10 lakhs. The court expressed concern about the large number of frivolous PILs and the burden they place on the judicial system, especially when there are cases involving personal liberty awaiting resolution. It emphasised that PILs should inspire confidence in the courts and the public, upholding the rule of law.
Decision of the Court:
The Delhi High Court dismissed the PIL and imposed a cost of Rs.1,00,000 on the petitioner, instructing her to pay it to the Army Battle Causalities Welfare Fund within 30 days. The Court refrained from initiating contempt proceedings due to the petitioner's gender but issued a stern warning against filing frivolous PILs by suppressing material facts.
Case Name: Ms. Sabiha Parveen vs. Government of NCT of Delhi & Ors.
Coram: Hon’ble Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela
Case No.: W.P.(C) 11646/2023
Advocate of the Petitioner: Hemant Chaudhary
Advocates of the Respondents: Santosh Kumar Tripathi, Arun Panwar, Pradyumn Rao, Utkarsh Singh, Kartik Sharma, Prashansa Sharma, Rishabh Srivastava, Manish Srivastava, Yash Srivastava, Santosh Ramdurg, Ashutosh Gupta, Arman Monga, Sanjay Vashistha, Vishal Kumar, Jai Sahai Endlaw, Sonal Raj, and Sher Singh
Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com
Picture Source :
