DATE OF JUDGMENT: 26th March, 2021
JUDGES: Hon’ble Justice Indira Banerjee and Hon’ble Justice Krishna Murari
PARTIES
- The state of West Bengal & ors. (Petitioners)
- Dipak Misra (Respondent)
SUMMARY: The Supreme Court stated that public interest litigation (PILs) cannot be discarded because the appellant is a part of the opposite political party.
AN OVERVIEW
- The Supreme Court provided ad hoc stay on a Calcutta High Court order which invigorated criminal cases associated to the Nandigram violence against Chief Minister of West Bengal Mamta Banerjee’s election agent. It instructed that no forcible steps to be taken against SK Supian for two weeks.
- The High Court order came on March 5 in which two PILs and the order of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate stayed in which discharging Supian from the criminal case of 2007 and other alike orders passed on different dates acquitting various other persons blamed from criminal cases against them.
ISSUES
The following issue was analyzed by the court-
- Whether PILs can be thrown out because the appellant belongs to rival political party?
IMPORTANT PROVISIONS
- Section 321 of Criminal Procedure code: Withdrawal from prosecution.
ANALYSIS OF THE JUDGEMENT
- A division Bench of Hon’ble Justice Indira Banerjee and Hon’ble Justice Krishna Murari while noticing that the Court is entailed to scrutinize if litigation is actually in the public interest or to evolve some other interest in the name of public interest. Though, the question of whether the litigation is genuine or not is a different issue which has to be inspected by the Court on a case to case basis, concerned to the nature of the complaint before it.
- The observations by the court were made in reference to submissions by appellant's Counsel Sr Adv Vikas Singh and Sr Adv AM Singhvi occurring for the State of West Bengal who had submitted that the PILs were instigated by persons belonging to a political party for implicit reasons and should therefore have not been pondered.
- The Court has noticed that writ petitions are pending in the High Court and has asked the Division Bench of the High Court to take up the pleas and decide the same within a week or two. It will thus be open to the respective parties to present all contentions before the High Court. The Court observed that as the impugned order effects was passed without hearing petitioner, its appropriate to pass an interim order staying operation of the order so far as it affect the petitioner for a period of 2 weeks till date or until the further order of High Court hears the case.
- The current Special Leave Petition has been directed by Sk. Supian, being persecuted by passing of an order by the Calcutta High Court in a PIL petition, without giving him notice, or being impleaded, or an opportunity to be heard, which caused in re-institution of criminal cases that were against him in which he was discharged in February 2020.
- The Petitioner has stated that he was acquitted by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate under S. 321, Criminal Procedure Code, in certain criminal cases. According to the appellant, the cases against him claimed that he had engaged in an unlawful assembly and had contributed in the violence.
- Supian in his plea claimed that his personal liberty has been prejudiced, as he was not impleaded before the passing of impugned order, and was provided no opportunity to be heard by the High Court. He became informed of the cases upon knowledge of instigation of the process to issue arrest warrants against him by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate.
CONCLUSION
Supreme Court has observed that a Public Interest Litigation (PILs) cannot be thrown out only because the petitioner belongs to a rival political party. The Court has further observed that the person who has political allegations is, as much authorized to file PIL as any other person. The annotations have been made by the Court in its order by providing interim relief to the election agent of Bengal CM Mamta Banerjee's, SK Supian in relation to matter of invigorated FIRs against him in Nandigram violence case.
Click here to download the original copy of the judgement
