The Indore bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court has taken a stern stance against what it deemed a misuse of the judicial process, dismissing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) and imposing a significant fine. The case was connected to an alleged assault on a police constable in Khargone, which reportedly stemmed from an incident involving a missing dog.
Court's Stern Order and Fine
A division bench comprising Justice Vijay Kumar Shukla and Justice Vinod Kumar Dwivedi delivered the order on December 3. The court dismissed the PIL filed by Sachin Sisodia, the Khargone district president of JAYS. The bench was unequivocal in its judgment, stating that the petition was filed with ulterior motives and was not a genuine PIL.
Consequently, the court imposed a cost of Rs one lakh on the petitioner. The fine is to be paid to the High Court Legal Aid Services Authority in Indore within one month from December 3. The order specified that this amount must be kept in a separate account and used specifically for upgrading the dispensary of the High Court in Indore.
Background of the Case and Previous Petition
The PIL sought action against a Reserve Inspector for allegedly beating police constable Rahul Chauhan. However, the court noted a critical detail that undermined the petitioner's case. It revealed that Constable Rahul Chauhan himself had initially filed a PIL in the matter.
Later, on October 14, Chauhan appeared personally before the court and withdrew his petition, citing a settlement between the parties. Following his request, that earlier petition was dismissed as withdrawn. This fact played a pivotal role in the court's reasoning for dismissing the subsequent PIL.
Court's Reasoning for Dismissal
The bench observed that since the victim of the alleged assault had already approached the court and subsequently settled the matter, there was no valid justification for a third party to intervene. The court concluded that the matter had been adequately brought before it by the concerned individual himself.
By dismissing the PIL with a heavy cost, the court sent a clear message against the filing of frivolous or motivated litigations that burden the judicial system. This order highlights the judiciary's intent to preserve the sanctity of the PIL mechanism for genuine public interest causes.
