Chief Justice D K Upadhyaya and Justice Arif Doctor, constituting the division bench, declined to entertain the PIL, expressing dissatisfaction with its lack of specifics….reports Asian Lite News
The Bombay High Court, in a recent hearing, rejected the inclusion of information obtained from social media in public interest litigation (PIL) proceedings. The PIL, filed by advocate Ajitsingh Ghorpade, sought the Maharashtra government’s intervention in safeguarding waterfalls and water bodies, alleging an annual loss of 1,500 to 2,000 lives in unsafe locations in the state.
Chief Justice D K Upadhyaya and Justice Arif Doctor, constituting the division bench, declined to entertain the PIL, expressing dissatisfaction with its lack of specifics. Ghorpade’s lawyer, Manindra Pandey, mentioned that the data on fatalities was derived from newspapers and social media posts. However, the court criticized the petition as vague and admonished the use of social media information in PIL pleadings, emphasizing the need for responsibility in such legal actions.
The court questioned the petitioner’s approach, stating that filing a PIL based on accidental drownings during picnics might not necessarily constitute a violation of fundamental rights. The bench asserted that such cases were a “sheer wastage” of judicial time. Pandey argued for the state government to ensure the safety of individuals visiting these sites, but the court countered, highlighting the challenges of monitoring every waterfall and water body.
In response to the court’s queries about the petitioner’s firsthand knowledge, Pandey failed to provide substantial details. The bench suggested withdrawing the PIL and encouraged filing a more comprehensive one with proper specifics. The petitioner agreed, leading to the withdrawal of the petition.
