Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 33

S.S.

JAIN SUBODH LAW COLLEGE


MANSAROVAR JAIPUR

A PROJECT
ON
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION

SUBMITTED TO - SUBMITTED BY

Mr.ANIL SHARMA PULKIT BARA


Assistantprof LL.B. 1st Year Student
S.S.Jainsubodhlawcollege
CERTIFICATE

Mr.AnilSharma
AssistantProf.
S.S.jainsubodhLawCollege

Date: 20/02/2017

This is to certify that master. Pulkit bara 1st year law student of L.L.B 3 year
programme has carried out project titled public interest litigation under my
supervision .It is an investigation report of a minor project.
The student has completed research work in stipulated time and according to the
matter prescribed for the purpose.

Supervisor
Mr. Anil Sharma
Assistant Prof.
S.S. Jain Subodh Law College
Acknowledgement

The success and final outcome of this project required a lot of guidance and
assistance from many people and I am extremely privileged to have got this all
along the completion of my project their input have played a vital role in success of
this Project & formal piece of acknowledgement may not be sufficient to express the
feeling of Gratitude toward people who have helped me in successful completion of
this project.
I respect and thank Mr. Anil Sharma assistant prof. s.s. jain subodh law college for
providing me an opportunity to do the project work and giving us all support and
guidance which made me complete the project duly

I owe my deep gratitude to our principal Dr. Alpana sharma, for her constant
encouragement at every step of project by developing a good eco system.
I am thankful to and fortunate enough to get constant encouragement, support
and guidance from all Teachers and my fellow classmates who helped me in
successfully completing the project work.

Also, I would like to extend our sincere esteems to all staff in library for their timely
support.
TABLE OF CONTENT

SNO. Contents and particulars Page no

Part 1 - Introduction to PIL


1. Origin of PIL
2. Developments in PIL
3. When can a PIL be filed
4. Who can file a PIL
5. Against whom a PIL can be filed
6. Procedure to file a PIL
7. Relief provided by PIL
8. Contribution and benefits
9. Criticism
10. Conclusion

Part 2 – Sheela Barse v.s state of Maharashtra


1. Case facts
2. Statements
3. Arguments
4. Judgements

Part 3- Moot Memorial

Part4- court visits


1. Case1
2. Case2
3. Case3
4. Case4
PART 1

INTRODUCTION
TO
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION
Introduction:
Public Interest litigation, itself says that it is litigation for any public interest. We
can say that public interest litigation in a litigation which can be filed in any court of
law by any public spirited person for the protection of “public interest.”

Now a question arises that what exactly is public interest?

Any matter which is largely concerned with or affects general public or masses in
any manner is said to be public interest, for instance pollution, Terrorism, Road
safety, environmental hazards , child labour, women safety, human trafficking, are
matters related to public interest

Public interest litigation is not defined in any statute or any act. It has been
interpreted in different judgements to consider the intent of public at large. The
main tools employed to achieve such social change were the provisions on
fundamental rights (FRs) and the directive principles of state policy (DPSPs), which
Austin described as the ‘‘conscience of the Constitution”. In order to ensure that
FRs did not remain empty declarations, the founding fathers made various
provisions in the Constitution to establish an independent judiciary.

The provisions related to FRs, DPs and independent judiciary together provided a
firm constitutional foundation to the evolution of PIL in India. The founding fathers
envisaged ‘‘the judiciary as a bastion of rights and justice’’. An independent
judiciary armed with the power of judicial review was the constitutional device
chosen to achieve this objective. The power to enforce the FRs was conferred on
both the Supreme Court and the High Court the courts that have entertained all the
PIL cases. The judiciary can test not only the validity of laws and executive actions
but also of constitutional amendments. It has the final say on the interpretation of
the Constitution and its orders, supported to reach everyone throughout the
territory of the country. Since its inception, the Supreme Court has delivered
judgments of far-reaching importance involving not only adjudication of disputes
but also determination of public policies and establishment of rule of law and
constitutionalism.
Origin of PIL
As PIL in India was born in connection to the evolution of PIL in the United States, it
has been argued that PIL in India should be labelled as social action litigation
(SAL). It was contended that whereas PIL in the United States has focused on ‘‘civic
participation in governmental decision making’’, the Indian PIL discourse was
directed against ‘‘state repression or governmental lawlessness’’ and was focused
primarily on the rural poor. Also, unlike India, PIL in the United States sought to
represent ‘‘interests without groups’’ such as consumerism or
environment. However, for our purposes, Social Action Litigation (SAL) and Public
Interest Litigation (PIL) are synonymous. PIL, however, continues to be the
popularly used term

After gaining independence from the British rule on August 15, 1947, the people of
India adopted a Constitution in November 1949 with the hope to establish a
‘‘sovereign socialist secular democratic republic’’.

They wanted to develop India into a perfect egalitarian society where all
fundamental rights were secured, free from exploitation and subjugation of the
long suppressed people of India. Prior to 1980s, only the aggrieved party could
personally knock the doors of justice and seek remedy for his grievance and any
other person who was not personally affected could not knock the doors of justice
as a proxy for the victim or the aggrieved party.

In other words, only the affected parties had the locus standi (standing required in
law) to file a case and continue the litigation and the non affected persons had no
locus standi to do so. And as a result, there was hardly any link between the rights
guaranteed by the Constitution of Indian Union and the laws made by the
legislature on the one hand and the vast majority of illiterate citizens on the other.
The concept of Public Interest Litigation (PIL) is in consonance with the principles
enshrined in Article 39A of the Constitution of India to protect and deliver prompt
social justice with the help of law. Before the 1980s, only the aggrieved party could
approach the courts for justice. After the emergency era the high court reached out
to the people, devising a means for any person of the public (or an NGO) to
approach the court seeking legal remedy in cases where the public interest is at
stake. Justice P. N. Bhagwati and Justice V. R. Krishna Iyer were among the first
judges to admit PILs in court. Filing a PIL is not as cumbersome as a usual legal
case; there have been instances when letters and telegrams addressed to the court
have been taken up as PILs and heard.

In S.P. Gupta v. Union of India[xx] Bhagwati C.J. (as he then was) was even more
explicit:

“Where a legal wrong or a legal injury is caused to a person or to a determinate


class of persons … and such a person or determinate class of persons is by reason of
poverty, helplessness or disability or socially or economically disadvantaged
position, unable to approach the court for relief, any member of the public can
maintain an application for appropriate direction…”

The court justified such extension of standing in order to enforce rule of law and
provide justice to disadvantaged sections of society. Furthermore, the Supreme
Court observed that the term ‘‘appropriate proceedings’’ in Art.32 of the
Constitution does not refer to the form but to the purpose of proceeding: so long
as the purpose of the proceeding is to enforce a FR, any form will do. This
interpretation allowed the Court to develop epistolary jurisdiction by which even
letters or telegrams were accepted as writ petitions.
Developments of PIL

PIL, at least as it had developed in India, is different from class action or group
litigation. The latter is driven primarily by efficiency considerations, whereas the PIL
is concerned at providing access to justice to all societal constituents. PIL in India
has been a part of the constitutional litigation and not civil litigation.

The following is a timeline for some important cases which illustrate the
importance of PIL for the development and growth of the enforcement of FRs in
India.

Part III of the Indian Constitution enumerates a Bill of Rights within Articles 12 to
32. Article 13 provides that any laws which are inconsistent with the Constitution
are void. While Article 13 does not directly speak of the Supreme Court of India
having the power to declare the law unconstitutional, this has been taken to be the
structural assumption of the Constitution and in particular of Articles 13 and 32.
Article 14 enshrines the equal protection of the laws and equality before the law,
and later articles set this out in more detail in specific areas. Article 19 is one of the
most fundamental articles, safeguarding freedom of speech, association, assembly,
the right to move and reside within the territories of India, and to practice any
trade or profession.

The right to life and liberty is enshrined in Article 21, which has been the
cornerstone in the establishment and development of PIL in India. The courts have
expanded the meaning of this Right to ensure safe and dignified living for the
people of India. Religious freedoms are covered by Articles 25-27, and cultural
minorities are protected by Articles 28-30.

It is Article 32 which provides the teeth with which to enforce the preceding
provisions. An individual is granted the right to move the Supreme Court to provide
a remedy for breach of any of the more particular rights mentioned above. The
Supreme Court has a wide range of such remedies at its disposal, and the right
guaranteed by Article 32 cannot be suspended except as otherwise provided by the
Constitution.
The importance of Article 32 was emphasized by Dr Ambedkar, one of the principal
architects of the Constitution, who regarded this article as the very soul and heart
of the constitutional document.

Whereas Part III of the Constitution is entitled Fundamental Rights, Part IV thereof
deals with ‘Directive Principles of State Policy’. Article 37 states explicitly that the
principles of Part IV are not enforceable in any Court, but affirms that they are
nonetheless fundamental to the governance of the country and the Article imposes
an obligation on the State to comply with these principles when making laws. Thus,
Article 38 directs the State to reduce inequalities in status and opportunity, and
Article 39 mandates that the distribution of society’s resources must be such as to
serve the common good. Subsequent articles within Part IV flesh out the socio-
economic obligations which the State must pursue within particular areas.

The Conceptual Foundation of Public Interest Litigations is thus derived from the
Constitution.

the development of pil in India could be divided, into three broad phases. One will
notice that these three phases .

In the first phase—which began in the late 1970s and continued through the
1980s—the PIL cases were generally filed by public-spirited persons (lawyers,
journalists, social activists or academics). Most of the cases related to the rights of
disadvantaged sections of society such as child labourers, bonded labourers,
prisoners, mentally challenged, pavement dwellers, and women. The relief was
sought against the action or non-action on the part of executive agencies resulting
in violations of FRs under the Constitution. During this phase, the judiciary
responded by recognising the rights of these people and giving directions to the
government to redress the alleged violations. In short, it is arguable that in the first
phase, the PIL truly became an instrument of the type of social
transformation/revolution that the founding fathers had expected to achieve
through the Constitution.

The second phase of the PIL was in the 1990s during which several significant
changes in the chemistry of PIL took place. In comparison to the first phase, the
filing of PIL cases became more institutionalised in that several specialised NGOs
and lawyers started bringing matters of public interest to the courts on a much
regular basis. The breadth of issues rose in PIL also expanded tremendously—from
the protection of environment to corruption-free administration, right to
education, sexual harassment at the workplace, relocation of industries, rule of law,
good governance, and the general accountability of the Government. It is to be
noted that in this phase, the petitioners sought relief not only against the
action/non-action of the executive but also against private individuals, in relation to
policy matters, and regarding something that would clearly fall within the domain
of the legislature.

It is thus apparent that in the second phase the PIL discourse broke new grounds
and chartered on previously unknown paths in that it moved much beyond the
declared objective for which PIL was meant. The courts, for instance, took resort to
judicial legislation when needed, did not hesitate to reach centres of government
power, tried to extend the protection of FRs against non-state actors, moved to
protect the interests of the middle class rather than poor populace, and sought
means to control the misuse of PIL for ulterior purposes.

On the other hand, the third phase—the present phase, which began with the 21st
century—is a period in which anyone could file a PIL for almost anything. It seems
that there is a further expansion of issues that could be raised as PIL, e.g. calling
back the Indian cricket team from the Australia tour and preventing an alleged
marriage of an actress with trees for astrological reasons. From the judiciary’s point
of view, one could argue that it is time for judicial introspection and for reviewing
what courts tried to achieve through PIL. As compared to the second phase, the
judiciary has seemingly shown is unlikely to roll back the expansive scope of PIL, it is
possible that it might make more measured interventions in the future.
When Can A PIL Be Filled:
Public interest litigation can be filed only in matters or cases where
“comprehensive public interest” is vested

These are some of the possible areas where a PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION can be
filed.

 Where a factory / industrial unit is causing air pollution, and people nearly
are getting effected.
 Where, in an area / street there are no street lights, causing inconvenience
to commuters
 Where some "Banquet Hall" plays a loud music, in night causing noise
pollution.
 Where some construction company is cutting down trees, causing
environmental pollution.
 Where poor people, are affected, because of state government's arbitrary
decision to impose heavy "tax".
 For directing the police / Jail authorities to take appropriate decisions in
regards to jail reforms, such as segregation of convicts, delay in trial,
production of under trial before the court on remand dates.
 For abolishing child labor, and bonded labor.
 Where rights of working women are affected by sexual harassment.
 For keeping a check on corruption and crime involving holders of high
political officer.
 For maintaining Roads, Sewer etc in good conditions.
 For removal of Big Hoarding and signboard from the busy road to avoid
traffic problem.
 Recently a PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION has been filed, for directing the
"Delhi Traffic Police" to stop the method of sending challan to address by
post, as it is being misused.

Hence, it is clear that there are various matters in which any public spirited person
can file PIL given that such matter or case involve interest of public.

.
Who Can File A Pil?

Any person can file a PIL on behalf of a group of aggrieved people or general public
for violation of collective rights, even though he has not suffered personal injury in
any manner. In other words PIL must be filed for protection of general public
interest. If only a couple of people seek redressal then it is will not qualify for a
ground of PIL..

So these are the essential point for that person who can file any public interest
litigation.

 He is a member of the public acting bona fide and having sufficient interest in
instituting an action for redressal of public wrong or public injury.
 He is not a mere busy body or a meddlesome interloper.
 His action is not motivated by personal gain or any other oblique
consideration.

In case of Indian council for Enviro-legal action v union of india chemical industry
were causing problem of pollution, affecting right to life, NGO filed petition on
behalf of the aggrieved people. Secondly in the case of Banvasi seva Ashram v state
of U.P in this case, the NGO filed a petition on behalf of the tribal's of the affected
area.

In case of S.P Gupta V Union of India AIR (1981) 4 SCC 463, in this case it
was stated that in order to ensure access to justice to a large masses of people, it
was decided that any public spirited can file a PIL on bealf of aggrieved people who
by the reason of their poverty, socially and economically disadvantaged position
are unable to approach the court for relief.
Against Whom Public Interest Litigation Can Be Filed?
Now this is a curious part of PIL that if any public spirited person wants to file PIL in
court of law but the question is where? So the answer is this that any public
spirited person can file any PIL but only against the state govt./ central govt. or any
municipality authority but against to the any private party but it doesn't mean that
private party does not comes under the sphere of PIL. A private party also can be
tried by the PIL by acting a role of respondent after making concern by the state
authorities.

For example- If there is a Private factory in Delhi, which is causing pollution, then
people living nearly, or any other person can file a PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION
against:

1. Government of Delhi
2. State Pollution Control Board, and
3. Also against the private factory

But public interest litigation cannot file against only private party without
concerning state govt. or central govt. as in the above case this case was against
the union of India not to that corporation whose fault was there.

If the State agencies are not enthusiastic in enforcing the Court orders and do not
actively cooperate in that task, the object and purpose of the public interest
litigation would remain unfulfilled. The consequence of the failure of the State
machinery to secure enforcement of the Court orders would not only be to deny
effective justice to the disadvantaged groups on whose behalf the particular public
interest litigation is brought, but it also would have a demoralizing effect and
people would lose faith in the capacity of public interest litigation to deliver
justice.[liv] Therefore, monitoring agencies were appointed to keep a track of the
enforcement of orders given in various PILs by the Court.
Procedure To File A Public Interest Litigation:
Procedure to file a public interest litigation is just like a filing a general writ in high
court or Supreme Court.

In High Court:
If a PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION is filed in a High court, then two (2) copies of the
petition have to be filed. Also, an advance copy of the petition has to be served on
the each respondent, i.e. opposite party, and this proof of service has to be affixed
on the petition.

In Supreme Court:
If a PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION is filed in the Supreme court, then (4)+(1) (i.e. 5)
sets of petition has to be filed opposite party is served, the copy only when notice is
issued.

Court Fees:
A Court fee of RS. 50, per respondent (i.e. for each number of opposite party, court
fees of RS. 50) has to be affixed on the petition.

Procedure:
1. Proceedings, in the PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION commence and carry on in
the same manner, as other cases.
2. However, in between the proceedings if the judge feels he may appoint a
commissioner, to inspect allegations like pollution being caused, trees being
cut, sewer problems, etc.
3. After filing of replies, by opposite party, and rejoinder by the petitioner, final
hearing takes place, and the judge gives his final decision.
A Letter Can Also Be Treated As PIL:
In early 90's there have been instances, where judges have treated a post card
containing facts, as a PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION.

some of them are:

1. Letter alleging the illegal limestone quarrying which devastated the fragile
environment in the Himalayan foothills around Mussoorie, was treated as a
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION
2. A journalist complained to the Supreme Court in a letter, that the national
coastline was being sullied by unplanned development which violated the
central government directive was treated as a PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION

In a landmark judgment, in D.K. Basu v State of West Bengal, the court acted upon
a letter petition which drew attention to the repeated instances of custodial deaths
in West Bengal. The court further mandated that a relative of the arrested must be
promptly notified. It made clear that the failure to comply with this direction would
be punishable as contempt of court. The early PILs had witnessed the award of
compensation by the court to victims of human rights violations.

Secondly in the case of HINDUSTAN TIMES V CENTRAL POLLUTION BOARD a news


paper cutting was taken as complaint by the court of law. In other case kamalnath v
union of India kamalnath had a lakeside hotel in mussorie. The proprietors wanted
to increase the area. They encroached the canal and built rooms there, thereby
violating right to clean environment by taking pollution a grievous level. A news
item of the same appeared and it was considered by the court.
Reliefs Available By Public Interest Litigation
By such a petition many kind of relief are available here to secure the public
interest at large.

That relief is:

Interim Measures
The court can afford an early interim measure to protect the public interest till the
final order for example:

1. Release of under trial on personal bonds ordering release of all under trial
who have been imprisoned for longer time, than the punishment period, free
legal aid to the prisoners, imposing an affirmative duty on magistrates to
inform under trial prisoners of their right to bail and legal aid. Or
2. Closure of Industrial plant emitting poisonous gas, setting up victim
compensation scheme, ordering the plaint reopening subject to extensive
directions etc. Or
3. Prohibiting cutting of trees or making provisions for discharge of sewage, till
the disposal of final petition.

Relief in most of the PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION cases in the Supreme Court is
obtained through interim orders.

Appointing A Committee
1. The court may appoint a committee, or commissioner to look into the
matter, and submit its report.
2. Such committee or commissioner may also be given power to take
cognizance of grievances and settle it right in the public intent.

Final Orders
The court may also give final orders by way of direction to comply within a
stipulated time.
Contribution of PIL in Judicial Administration

By taking up the issues affecting the people, PIL truly became a vehicle to bring
social revolution through constitutional means, something that the founding
fathers had hoped.

PIL became an instrument to promote rule of law, demand fairness and


transparency, fight corruption in administration, and enhance the overall
accountability of the government agencies. The underlying justification for these
public demands and the judicial intervention was to strengthen constitutionalism—
a constant desire of the civil society to keep government powers under check. This
resulted in the judiciary giving directions to the government to follow its
constitutional obligations.

Vigilant citizens can find an inexpensive remedy because there is only a nominal
rate of court fees.

Litigants can focus attention on and achieve results pertaining to larger public
issues especially in the field of human rights, consumer welfare and the
environment.

The Indian judiciary, courtesy of PIL, has helped in cooling down a few controversial
policy questions on which the society was sharply divided. One could think of the
controversy about the reservation of seats for SCs/STs and other backwards classes
in employment or educations institutions, the government policies of liberalisation
and privatisation, and the contested height of the Narmada dam as examples of
this kind of contribution.

The Indian PIL jurisprudence has also contributed to the trans-judicial influence—
especially in South Asia—in that courts in Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Nepal
have cited Indian PIL cases to develop their own PIL jurisprudence In a few cases,
even Hong Kong courts have cited Indian PIL cases, in particular cases dealing with
environmental issues. Given that the civil society that is following the development
of PIL in China is familiar with the Indian PIL jurisprudence, it is possible that Indian
PIL cases might be cited even before the Chinese courts in the future.
The two ways in which PILs have helped the general public are:

1. In Public Interest Litigation (PIL) vigilant citizens of the country can find an
inexpensive legal remedy because there is only a nominal fixed court fee
involved in this.
2. Further, through the so-called PIL, the litigants can focus attention on and
achieve results pertaining to larger public issues, especially in the fields of
human rights, consumer welfare and environment.

PIL has helped the Indian judiciary to gain public confidence and establish
legitimacy in the society. The role of an independent judiciary in a democracy is of
course important. But given that judges are neither elected by public nor are they
accountable to public or their representatives ordinarily, the judiciary in a
democracy is susceptible to public criticism for representing the elite or being
undemocratic and anti-majoritarian. Therefore, it becomes critical for the judiciary
to be seen by the public to be not only independent but also in touch with social
realities.
Criticism and Demerits

In recent years, PILs have been brought not only for the violation of Fundamental
rights but also for a various other issues. The judiciary, for instance, has addressed
issues such as: the constitutionality of the Government’s privatisation and
disinvestment policies, defacing of rocks by painted advertisements, the danger to
the Taj Mahal from a refinery, pollution of rivers, relocation of industries out of
Delhi, use of environment-friendly fuel in Delhi buses and regulation of traffic, out
of turn allotment of government accommodation, prohibition of smoking in public
places, arbitrary allotment of petrol outlets, investigation of alleged bribe taking,
employment of children in hazardous industries and female foeticide and
infanticide through modern technology

Public Interest or Private Interest

Over the past years, it has been difficult to distinguish that whether the PILs are for
public interest or private interest of the individual who files them. Courts supported
PIL because of its usefulness in serving the public interest. Almost any issue is
presented to the courts in the guise of public interest because of the allurements
that the PIL jurisprudence offers inexpensive, quick response and high impact
because courts have not rigorously enforced the requirement of PILs being aimed
at espousing some public interest. PIL is being misused by people agitating for
private grievances in the grab of public interest and seeking publicity rather than
espousing public causes.

Abuse of Judicial Resources

considering that the number of per capita judges in India is much lower than many
other countries and given that the Indian Supreme Court as well as High Courts is
facing a huge backlog of cases, it is puzzling why the courts have not done enough
to stop faulty PIL cases. In fact, by allowing frivolous PIL plaintiffs to waste the time
and energy of the courts, the judiciary might be violating the right to speedy trial of
those who are waiting for the vindication of their private interests through
conventional adversarial litigation.
Conclusion

PIL has an important role to play in the civil justice system in that it affords a ladder
to justice to disadvantaged sections of society, some of which might not even be
well-informed about their rights. Furthermore, it provides an avenue to enforce
diffused rights for which either it is difficult to identify an aggrieved person or
where aggrieved persons have no incentives to knock at the doors of the courts. PIL
could also contribute to good governance by keeping the government accountable.
Last but not least, PIL enables civil society to play an active role in spreading social
awareness about human rights, in providing voice to the marginalised sections of
society, and in allowing their participation in government decision making.

Indian PIL experience also shows that it is critical to ensure that PIL does not
become a back-door to enter the temple of justice to fulfil private interests, settle
political scores or simply to gain easy publicity. Courts should also not use PIL as a
device to run the country on a day-to-day basis or enter the legitimate domain of
the executive and legislature.

The analysis of PIL “cases” shows that they appear to consume a significant share of
the resources of the Supreme Court resulting in its abuse. The subject matter of PIL
cases and orders remains difficult to discern because most of them are classified as
“other,” which is problematic from the point of view of judicial transparency.

A number of criticisms of PIL have been voiced in recent years, including concerns
related to separation of powers, judicial capacity, and inequality. While critics have
been persuasive when pointing to particular cases, the sheer number of cases, as
well as the variation in tendencies over time and among court benches, has made
reaching a general conclusion difficult.
PART -2

CASE STUDY
ON
SHEELA BARSE
V.
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
AIR (1987) SC
Case facts:-

PETITIONER:
SHEELA BARSE

RESPONDENT:
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

DATE OF JUDGMENT 18/09/1987

BENCH:
MISRA RANGNATH
BENCH:
MISRA RANGNATH
DUTT, M.M. (J)

REASON FOR PETITION:-

- Petitioner is a Bombay-based free lance journalist who had sought permission to


interview women prisoners in the Maharashtra jails and on 6.5.1982,
- the Inspector-General of Prisons of the State permitted her to do so in respect of
female prisoners lodged in the Bombay Central Jail, the Yerawada Central Jail at
Pune and the Kolhapur District Jail.
- When the petitioner started tape-recording her interviews with the prisoners at
the Bombay Central Jail, she was advised instead to keep notes only of interviews.
When the petitioner raised objection on this score, the Inspector-General of
Prisons orally indicated that he had changed his mind.
- Later, the petitioner was informed that grant of permission to have interview was
a matter of discretion of the Inspector-General and such interviews are ordinarily
allowed to research scholars only.
- Petitioner has made grievance over the withdrawal of the permission and has
pleaded that it is the citizen's right to know if Government is administering the
jails in accordance with law. Petitioner's letter was treated as a writ petition under
Article 32 of the Constitution.
STATEMENT OF PIL :
 Permission to journalists to interview prisoner
 Permission to Tape-record the interviews,
 What is guaranteed under Articles 19(1)(a) and 21-Benefits thereof for all the
citizens.
 Whether the media has right to take interview from prisoner’s and Discriminate
to public.
 WhetherArticle19 (i.e)right to speech is violated or not?

ARGUMENTS OF PETITIONER:

 citizen has “ a right to know “under Articles 19(1)(a) and 21


Of the Constitution, if the Government is administering the jails
in accordance with law.

 Contended that as a journalist she had the right to collect and disseminate
Information to citizens.

 That the Press has a special responsibility to collect information on public


issues to educate the people.

COUNTER ARGUMENT BY RESPONDENT:

 The permission was cancelled, on the ground inter alia that the
Permission had been granted to the Petitioner in contravention of the
Maharashtra Prison Manual and the rules made there under, which govern
the interviews with the prisoners.

 The petitioner, an amateur free lance journalist not employed by any


responsible newspaper, was not covered by the said rules.

 The state contended that if unguided and uncontrolled right of visit was
provided to citizens, it would be difficult to maintain discipline and the very
purpose of keeping the delinquents in prison would be frustrated.

 the prisons authorities are directed not to allow Interviews with the prisoners
unless the person seeking interview was a research scholar Studying for Ph.D.
or intending to visit the prison as a part of his field work of curriculum
Prescribed for post-graduate course etc.
JUDGEMENT:-

The term 'life' in Article 21 covers the living conditions of the prisoners, prevailing
in the jails. The prisoners are also entitled to the benefit of the guarantees
provided in the Article subject to reason able restrictions.
It is necessary that public gaze should be permitted on the prisoners, and the
pressmen as friends of the society and public spirited citizens should have access
to information about, and interviews with, the prisoners. But such access has to
be controlled and regulated. The petitioner is not entitled to uncontrolled
interviews. The factual information collected as a result of the interviews should
usually be cross-checked with the authorities, so that a wrong picture of a situation
may not be published.

Disclosure of correct information is necessary, but there is to be no dissemination


of wrong information. Persons, who get permission to interview, have to abide by
reasonable Restrictions. As for tape-recording the interviews, there may be cases
where such tape-recording is necessary, but Tape-recording is to be subject to
special permission of the
Appropriate authority.
In such a situation we are of the view that public access should be permitted. We
have already pointed out that the citizen does not have any right either
under Article 19(1)(a) or 21 to enter into the jails for collection of information but
in order that the guarantee of the fundamental right under Article 21 may be
available to the citizens detained in the jails, it becomes necessary to permit
citizen's access to information as also interviews with prisoners. Interviews become
necessary as otherwise the correct information may not be collected but such
access has got to be controlled and regulated.

The Court observed that public gaze should be directed to such matters and the
pressmen as friends of the society and public spirited citizens should have access not
only to information but also interviews. Therefore Court permitted public to prisons.
The Court, Giving the dividing line, observed that citizens did not have any right
either under Article 19(1) (a) o r21 to enter into the jails for collection of information
but in order that he Guarantee of the fundamental right under Article21may be
available to the citizens detained in the jails.
The court found it necessary to permit citizen's access to information as also
interviews with prisoners. Interviews become necessary as otherwise the correct
information may not be collected but such access had to be controlled and
regulated.
Hence petitioner's claim that she was entitled to uncontrolled interview was not
accepted. The Court held that there may be cases where such tape-recording was
necessary but Court made It clear that tape-recordings should be subject to special
permission of the Appropriate authority and hence the petitioner was directed to
make an application to the prescribed authority for the requisite permission which
was to be dealt by the authorities in The light of the guide lines laid down in the
case.
The case also provided with the guidelines which The authorities have to keep in
mind while considering an application made by the press People for the purpose of
taking any interview of a prisoner. It has further to be understood that interviews
cannot be forced and willingness of the prisoners to be interviewed would always be
insisted upon. The interviews which are taken have further to be cross checked and
verified by the authorities before it’s becoming public so as to ensure that only the
correct information ultimately reaches the masses.
CASE 1
(Case filed u/s 19/54, Rajasthan Excise Act, 1950)

NAME OF THE COURT– Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division) Metropolitan


Magistrate-10, Jaipur

NAME OF THE PRESIDING OFFICER–HON’BLE Justice Mr. Ashutosh Kumawat

CASE NO–201/14. DATE–16/01/2017

NAME OF THE CASE-State v. Banwari Lal

SUBJECT MATTER–In this case, SHO, P.S. Murlipura submitted chargesheet under
Section 19/54 of Rajasthan Excise Act 1950, for illegal possession of liquor against
Banwari Lal and the case was filed against the accused for this.

STAGE OF PROCEEDING–Today the file was fixed for recording prosecution


evidences and also to record the testimony of prosecution witnesses.

OBSERVATION–In this case, the court has taken cognizance of offence committed
by BanwariLal, convicted under section 19/54 of Rajasthan Excise Act 1950.The
advocate presenting the accused is Mr. Narendra Singh Rajawat and the Assistant
Public Prosecutor Mrs. Renu Nayak from the state side argumenting the charges
against the accused.As defined in the case that SHO, P.S. Murlipura on his round
with the C.I. Rameshwar Lal received information for the illegal possession and sale
of liquor such as local wine, English wine,beer etc. by the accused Mr .Banwari Lal.
The accused purchased and sold liquor within the state and outside without
acquiring the license. Knowing this the police took action against the accused and
caught him with the unauthorised liquor cartons. After hearing the charge
arguments, charge of the same offence was framed in writing separately.
Prosecution Witness-1, RameshwarLal was examined and his testimony was
recorded. No other witness was present in the court. The charge was read over and
explained to the accused but the accused denied for the charges filed against him
and claimed another trial. So therefore, the file was adjourned for next proceeding.

SIGNOFSUPERVISOR SIGNOFPRESIDINGOFFICER
CASE 2

(Casefiledu/s19/54,RajasthanExciseAct,1950)

NAME OF THE COURT– Additional Civil Judge (JuniorDivision)Metropolitan Magistrate-


10,Jaipur

NAME OF THE PRESIDING OFFICER–HON’BLE Justice Mr. Ashutosh Kumawat

CASE NO.–751/14 DATE–

16/01/2017

NAME OF THE CASE-State v .Bahadur Sansi

SUBJECT MATTER–In this case, C.I.Jaipur, Mr. Brijesh Kumar of Excise Prevention
Force filed the charge sheet under section19/54 of Rajasthan Excise Act1950, for

Illegal possession of liquor as the accused was found guilty for illegal possession of
English wine which was labelled as “ForSaleinHaryanaOnly” as well as beer and local
Liquor labelled as “ForSaleinRajasthanOnly” beyond the pre-defined limit to be
Possessed by an individual stated in Rajasthan Excise Act 1950.The case was filed
Against the accused for this.

STAGE OF PROCEEDING–Today the file was fixed to charge arguments over the
accused but he denied the charge and claimed trial.
OBSERVATION–In this case, the court has taken cognizanceofoffencecommitedby
BahadurSansi,convictedundersection19/54ofRajasthanExciseAct1950.The

advocatepresentingtheaccusedisMr.RameshPalodaandtheAssistantPublic
ProsecutorMrs.RenuNayakfrom thestatesideargumentingthechargesagainstthe
accused.AsdefinedinthecasefileC.I.Mr.BrijeshKumar,ExcisePreventionForceon
hisroundwithhisteamreceivedinformationabouttheaccusedselingilicitliquorover
road.TheaccusedBahadurSansiwasfoundwithsomecartonsfulofEnglishwine,
localliquorandbeer.Whileresearchingitwasknownthattheaccusedhadnotacquired

alicenseforpossessingliquorbeyondthelimitset.Thepresidingofficerheardthe
argumentschargedagainsttheaccusedfiledundersection19/54oftheRajasthan
ExciseAct1950forunauthorisedpossessionandsaleofliquor.Boththeadvocates
werepresentinthecourt.Theevidenceandwitnesseswerecrossexamined.The
chargewasframedinwritingseparately.Itwasreadoverandexplainedtotheaccused
buttheaccuseddeniedforthechargesfiledagainsthimandclaimedanothertrial.So

therefore,thefilewasadjournedforprosecutioninthenextstage.

Вам также может понравиться