[PIL For Removal Of Governor Of Maharashtra] “How is this a PIL?”: Bombay High Court Questions Petitioner

Read Time: 05 minutes


The division bench of the Bombay High Court questioned the petitioner as to how can they restrain the governor from speaking. The PIL sought direction for the impeachment of the Governor of Maharashtra for his alleged remarks against Shivaji Maharaj, Savitri, and Jyotiba Phule

A Division Bench of Chief Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Abhay Ahuja on Thursday questioned the petitioner as to how can the court refrain the Governor of Maharashtra from speaking. The petition sought the removal of the Governor of Maharashtra for his comments against Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj, Savitri, and Jyotiba Phule.

The Petition filed through Advocate Nitin Satpute was mentioned before the division bench on Thursday. He said that the governor should be restrained from speaking on this issue. However, the bench questioned the petitioner, “Can we restrain” and how is this a PIL?”.

The bench then informed the petitioner that it would fix the date for hearing the PIL after reading the documents.

The petition stated that the Governor on 2 February 2022 had said that Samrath Ramdas was the 'Guru' of the Chatrapati Shivaji Maharaj, which is contrary to the historical evidence.

As per the plea, the Statement of the Governor was:

"Many chakravartins [emperors], maharajas took birth on this land. But, who would have asked about Chandragupta had there not been Chanakya? Who would have asked about Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj had there not been Samarth [Ramdas]?"

The PIL further read that the Governor of Maharashtra also made remarks against Savitri Phule and Jyotiba Phule. As per the plea, he had made remarks about their marriage while inaugurating a statue of Savitri Phule which was:

"Savitribai was married off when she was ten years old... and her husband [Jyotirao] was 13 years old. Now imagine, what would the boy and girl have been doing after marriage? What would they have been thinking?"

Calling the Governor as mentally not stable and seeking removal of the Governor, the PIL stated,

"Governor has become old person and not capable to function with his physical capacity. Removal of the Governor has become necessary as extraordinary and rare circumstances, including Physical or Mental incapacity, corruption, Constitutional violations, or misbehaviour. The Governor's removal cannot be based on the ideology or preferences with which she or he is associated."

It further prayed that till the disposal of the petition, the Governor should obtain a mental fitness/soundness certificate from a psychiatrist to prove his mental soundness

Case Title: Dipak Dilip Jagdev vs UOI & Ors