Case Note & Summary
The present Public Interest Litigation (PIL) was filed by National Amnesty & Redemption Organisation International Trust through its President, Deepak Suryakant Kavitkar, seeking directions for a thorough investigation into complaints against Sudhakar Pujari, a police officer. The PIL was filed through Advocate Subhash Jha. The court noted that this was the second PIL on the same subject matter. The first PIL, Criminal Writ Petition No. 1693 of 2009, was filed by Press Group of Maharashtra through the same advocate, seeking similar reliefs. That petition was disposed of by the court on 18th December 2009 with directions to the Director General of Police to consider the representation of the petitioner. The court observed that the present PIL was an abuse of the process of the court as it sought to reagitate the same issues. The court held that the principle of constructive res judicata applies to PILs and that the petitioner had no locus standi to file the second PIL. The court dismissed the PIL with costs of Rs. 25,000 to be paid to the Maharashtra State Legal Services Authority.
Headnote
A) Public Interest Litigation - Abuse of Process - Successive PILs - Filing of second PIL on same subject matter through different organization but same advocate amounts to abuse of process of court - The court held that the second PIL is not maintainable and dismissed it with costs of Rs. 25,000 to be paid to the Maharashtra State Legal Services Authority (Paras 1-18).
B) Public Interest Litigation - Locus Standi - Constructive Res Judicata - Principle of constructive res judicata applies to PILs - The court held that the petitioner cannot reagitate issues already decided in earlier PIL (Criminal Writ Petition No. 1693 of 2009) (Paras 2-10).
C) Public Interest Litigation - Costs - Deterrent Costs - Imposition of costs to discourage frivolous litigation - The court imposed costs of Rs. 25,000 on the petitioner to be paid to the Maharashtra State Legal Services Authority (Para 18).
Issue of Consideration
Whether a second Public Interest Litigation on the same subject matter, filed by a different organization but through the same advocate, is maintainable and whether it amounts to abuse of the process of the court.
Final Decision
The court dismissed the PIL with costs of Rs. 25,000 to be paid to the Maharashtra State Legal Services Authority within four weeks.
Law Points
- Public Interest Litigation
- Abuse of Process of Court
- Res Judicata
- Constructive Res Judicata
- Locus Standi
- Successive PILs
Case Details
Criminal Public Interest Litigation No. 50 of 2011 with Criminal Application No. 28 of 2012
A.M. Khanwilkar, K.K. Tated
Mr. Subhash Jha for Petitioner, Ms. A. S. Pai APP for Respondent State, Respondent No. 7 in person, Mr. Surel Shah for Applicant in APPI/28/2012, Ms. Racheeta Dhuru for Intervener
National Amnesty & Redemption Organisation International Trust
Shri R. R. Patil, State of Maharashtra, Additional Chief Secretary, Director General of Police, Director General Anti Corruption Bureau, Commissioner of Police Mumbai, Shri Sudhakar Pujari
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Public Interest Litigation seeking investigation into complaints against a police officer.
Remedy Sought
Direction to respondents to conduct thorough investigation into complaints against Sudhakar Pujari and submit report to the court.
Filing Reason
Alleged inaction by authorities on complaints against Sudhakar Pujari.
Previous Decisions
Earlier PIL (Criminal Writ Petition No. 1693 of 2009) filed by Press Group of Maharashtra on same subject matter was disposed of on 18th December 2009 with direction to Director General of Police to consider representation.
Issues
Whether the second PIL on the same subject matter is maintainable?
Whether filing successive PILs amounts to abuse of process of court?
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that the earlier PIL was filed by a different organization and the present PIL is by a different trust.
Respondents argued that the present PIL is an abuse of process as the same issues were already dealt with in the earlier PIL.
Ratio Decidendi
Filing successive Public Interest Litigations on the same subject matter through different organizations but same advocate amounts to abuse of process of court. The principle of constructive res judicata applies to PILs, and such litigation warrants dismissal with costs.
Judgment Excerpts
This is second Public Interest Litigation filed with regard to the same subject matter, through the same Advocate but, by another so called nongovernment organisation.
The present Petition is nothing but an abuse of process of law.
We have no hesitation in dismissing this Petition with costs.
Procedural History
First PIL (Criminal Writ Petition No. 1693 of 2009) filed by Press Group of Maharashtra was disposed of on 18th December 2009. Present PIL filed in 2011. Criminal Application No. 28 of 2012 filed for intervention. Judgment reserved on 1st February 2013 and pronounced on 8th February 2013.
