Read Time: 05 minutes
Court stated that if the petitioners were truly concerned, they should have approached authorities during the event instead of filing a belated petition
The Allahabad High Court has dismissed a public interest litigation (PIL) that sought a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) probe into alleged mismanagement and irregularities during the Mahakumbh Mela held earlier this year. The court found that the petition was based solely on newspaper reports and lacked any independent fact-finding effort by the petitioners.
A division bench comprising Chief Justice Arun Bhansali and Justice Kshitij Shailendra ruled that the PIL, filed by Keshar Singh and two others, did not present any substantial basis to warrant a separate investigation. The petitioners had sought a report on the alleged failures of the administration during the Mahakumbh Mela, including crowd management, water supply issues, pontoon bridge accessibility, stampede incidents, fire hazards, and the use of budgeted funds.
One of the key demands in the PIL was a direction for a CBI probe into a stampede that occurred on January 29, 2025, which led to multiple deaths. The petitioners also sought financial compensation for the families of the deceased.
However, the high court pointed out that the Uttar Pradesh government had already set up an Inquiry Commission under the Commissions of Inquiry Act, 1952, on the same day as the incident. The terms of the inquiry were further expanded through a notification issued on February 22, 2025, making the commission’s mandate comprehensive enough to address the concerns raised.
During the hearing, the state government argued that the PIL was based entirely on newspaper clippings and lacked any independent verification. Court took note of this and emphasized that PILs cannot be entertained if they rely solely on media reports without any effort by the petitioners to establish factual accuracy. The judges cited multiple Supreme Court precedents, including Kushum Lata vs. Union of India (2006) and Holicow Pictures Pvt. Ltd. vs. Prem Chandra Mishra (2007), which held that newspaper reports alone do not constitute admissible evidence in PILs.
Court further observed that if the petitioners were genuinely concerned about mismanagement during the Mahakumbh, they should have taken timely action by either reporting issues to authorities or seeking remedies during the event itself, rather than approaching the court after its conclusion.
Finding the PIL to be lacking in substance and primarily based on hearsay, the high court dismissed the petition.
Case Title: Keshar Singh and 2 others vs. State Of U.P. and 13 others
Please Login or Register
