Read Time: 04 minutes

Synopsis

The Bombay High Court has observed that information forming part of pleadings in a Public Interest Litigation cannot be sourced from social media.

The division bench of the high court comprising Chief Justice Devendra Upadhyaya and Justice Arif Doctor was hearing a public interest litigation file by advocate Ajitsingh Ghorbade. 

The petition sought a direction to be issued to the Maharashtra Government to deploy more police officials for people visiting different water bodies in Maharashtra. 

The PIL stated that every year 1500-2000 lives are lost due to unsafe water bodies and waterfalls every year. 

The division bench questioned Advocate Mahindra Pandey, representing the petitioner, about the source of the collected data.

Pandey admitted that he had gathered information from social media and newspapers. 

In response, the bench expressed displeasure, stating that the petitioner was wasting judicial time.

"Information gathered from social media cannot be part of pleadings in a PIL. You cannot be so irresponsible while filing PILs. You are wasting judicial time. Somebody goes for a picnic and accidentally drowns, therefore a PIL? Someone drowns in an accident, how is it a violation of fundamental rights under Articles 14 and 21," the court said. 

The petitioner suggested that the government should be directed to take steps to ensure safety as in one of the recent incidents, there was no rescue team available, resulting in the discovery of the victim's body only after two days.

The bench said that most of the incidents happen due to the recklessness of the victims. 

"What do you expect from the Maharashtra government? Can each and every waterfall and water body be manned by police?"

The division bench then asked the petitioner to file a fresh PIL with proper details. 

The petitioner agreed and withdrew the PIL.

Case title: Ajitsingh Ghorbade vs State of Maharashtra & Ors