Read Time: 05 minutes
The bench emphasised “the Court should also be dealing with frivolous PIL petitions being filed for extraneous reasons with firm hands and such attempts should be nipped in the bud”
In a recent development, the Bombay High Court has dismissed a public interest litigation (PIL) demanding the registration of a first information report (FIR) against celebrities involved in promoting tobacco and gutka products.
The case was heard by a Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Arif S. Doctor, who categorically stated that “By impleading certain celebrities in different walks of life in the society, the petitioner appears to be seeking publicity instead of taking the issue with expected seriousness.”
The bench observed that the petition lacked proper pleadings and failed to articulate appropriate prayers. Citing the judgment delivered by the Supreme Court in the case of ‘State of Uttaranchal vs. Balwant Singh Chaufal & Ors’ the court upheld the view that “Courts must encourage genuine and bona fide PIL and effectively discourage and curb the PIL filed for extraneous considerations.”
The petitioner, Yash Foundation, a non-governmental organisation, had urged the High Court to initiate FIR proceedings against various celebrities under Sections 328 (administering poison) and 120B (criminal conspiracy) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), along with provisions of the Food Safety and Standards of India Act (FSSI Act) and also under Disaster Management Act, 2005 as also Epidemic Diseases Act, 1897 and the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951. The organisation alleged that these celebrities were involved in surrogate advertisements for tobacco and gutka products.
Furthermore, the petition highlighted the alleged inaction of police authorities in registering FIRs against the accused celebrities. However, the court observed that the petitioner's approach seemed more focused on garnering attention than on addressing the legal merits of the case.
The bench emphasised “the Court should also be dealing with frivolous PIL petitions being filed for extraneous reasons with firm hands and such attempts should be nipped in the bud.”
Advocate Rajesh Khobragade, representing the petitioner, had previously lodged complaints with multiple police stations in Mumbai. Nonetheless, the court found no evidence to support the commission of any offences by the accused parties.
Consequently, upon facing the court's scrutiny, the petitioners opted to withdraw the petition, a request that was granted by the division bench.
However, the court sternly warned the petitioners and said “we find it appropriate to caution the petitioner that in future if it files any PIL petition, it should first do the necessary study and homework and then only take up the petitions with appropriate and proper pleadings.”
Cause Title: Yash Foundation v. Union of India [ PIL No. NO. 23688 OF 2023]
Please Login or Register
