In Indian law, litigation is known as safeguarding the public interest—Justice P N Bhagwati’s contribution to the Indian Judicial System. Justice PN Bhagwati has been referred to as the father of public interest litigation in India. He imparted idealism and simplicity to the highest court in the country wherein even a petition filed on a postcard was taken into consideration. It is not essential, for the exercise of the court’s jurisdiction, that an individual who is a victim of violation of her or his rights should approach the court on their own. Public Interest Litigation is a power given to the community courts through judicial activism.
These cases may take place when the victim does not have the essential resources to begin litigation or his or her freedom to move court has been encroached or suppressed.
Public interest Litigation,
In simple words, litigation is filed in a court of law, for the protection of Public Interest, such as pollution, food safety, constructional hazards, terrorism etc.
Public interest litigation is not specified in any act or any statue. It has been understood by judges to consider the intention of the public at large. Even though the only and primary focus of such litigation is only Public Interest, there are several areas where a Public interest litigation can be filed. For example:
- Violation of fundamental human rights of the poor
- Content or conduct of government policy
- Enforce municipal authorities to perform a public duty.
- Violation of religious rights or other basic fundamental rights
Public Interest:
Something in which the community, the public at large has something financial interest, or some interest by which their liabilities or legal rights are affected. It does not mean anything mere curiosity, or as the interest of the particular localities affected by the matters in question.
Who can file a PIL?
Anyone who is a citizen can file a public case by filing a petition;
- Under Art. 226, the Constitution of India, in High Court.
- Under Art. 32, the Constitution of India, in the Supreme Court.
- Under Sec. 133 of the CrPC, in the Court of Magistrate.
Nevertheless, the court must be convinced and satisfied that the Writ petition fulfils some essential needs for PIL as the letter is petitioned by the aggrieved individual, public-spirited person and a social action group for the implementation of Constitutional or legal rights to any individual who is unable to access the court for redress.
A PIL can be filed against a Municipal Authorities, Central/State Government, and not any private party. The definition of Stateis the same as given under Art. 12 of the Constitution of India. It comprises the Parliament of India, the Government, the Legislature of each State and all local authorities within the territory of India.
Significance of PIL
- The main aim of PIL is to enable the ordinary people access to the courts to achieve legal redress.
- PIL is an essential instrument of social transformation and for managing the law and accelerating the balance between justice and law.
- The initial purpose of PIL has beento make justice approachable and accessible to the marginalised and the poor.
- It is a vital tool to make human rights reach those in need and who have been declined rights.
- It equalises the access of justice to everyone. Any organisation or citizen who is competent can file petitions on behalf of those who are unable or do not have the means to do so.
- It assists in judicial monitoring of state institutions like asylums, prisons, and protective homes.
- It is an essential tool to put into action the concept of judicial review.
- The inception assures enhanced participation by the public in judicial review of administrative action of PILs.
Some Shortfalls of PIL
- PIL actions could sometimes give rise to the problem of competing rights. For example, when a court orders the closing of a polluting industry, the benefits of the workmen and the members of their families who are deprived of their livelihood may not be taken into consideration by the courts.
- It could contribute to the overburdening of courts with trivial PILs by parties with absolute interests.PILs today has been appropriated for political, corporate, and personal benefits. PIL nowadays is no more limited to issues of the oppressed and the poor.
Matters of Judicial Overreach by the Judiciary in solving environmental or socio-economic problems can occur through the PILs.
PIL matters concerning the disadvantaged and the exploited groups are pending for years. Extreme delays in the disposal of PIL cases may render several leading judgments hardly of academic value.
Conclusion
PIL has produced astonishing outcomes which were unthinkable about three decades ago. Degraded bonded labourers, women prisoners and tortured under trials, humiliated inmates of protective women’s home, exploited children, blinded prisoners, beggars, and many more have been given relief by judicial intervention.
The most exceptional contribution of PIL has been to enhance the answerability of the governments towards the human rights of the poor and the oppressed.
The PIL develops a new law of the accountability of the State for legal and constitutional violations adversely affecting the interests of the unsteady elements in the community.
Nevertheless, the Judiciary must be cautious enough in the implementation of PILs to refrain from Judicial Overreach, which is opposite of the principle of Separation of Power.
Also, the frivolous PILs with vested interests must be discouraged to keep its workload manageable.
