Title: Public Interest Litigations as a tool for helping
the weaker sections in society
Subject: Practical Training - II
Introduction:
The trend of the Supreme Court, in entertaining and even encouraging, writs filed in
public interest, has given a healthy boost to what is known as “Public Interest
Litigation” or Public Interest Litigation. When there is a breach of some public duty
or a breach of a constitutional provision which causes injury to the general public, any
person may be allowed to file a Public Interest Litigation for such violation. For this
purpose, legal formalities have been set aside and Courts have admitted letters and
telegrams as Public Interest Litigation.
Object:
The expression ‘Public Interest Litigation’ has been borrowed from American
jurisprudence, where it was designed to provide legal representation to previously
unrepresented groups like the poor, the racial minorities, unorganised consumers,
citizens who were passionate about the environmental issues, etc.
In India, Justice Bhagwati can be credited for popularising the concept of Public
Interest Litigation. In a case he observed: “It is necessary to democratise the judicial
remedies, remove technical barriers against easy accessibility to justice and promote
Public Interest Litigation, so that the large masses of people belonging to deprived
and exploited sections of humanity, may be able to realise and enjoy the socio-
economic rights granted to them.”1
Hence, in order to make judicial remedies accessible and within the reach of masses
Courts in India have encouraged PILs and also made the process of filing them
extremely simple and non-technical. Even the Supreme Court reiterated the view that
a letter addressed to the Supreme Court by a person acting pro bono publico, can be
treated as a Public Interest Litigation. It would neither be right nor fair to expect such
a person to incur expenses from his own pocket to go to a lawyer and have a regular
Public Interest Litigation filed in the Court. Therefore, in such cases, even a simple
letter complaining of legal injury to the writer (or to a class of persons, who on
account of poverty or disability or socially or economically disadvantaged position,
cannot approach the Court for relief) can be tried and disposed of.2
From the discussion above one can also look at PILs as another example of Judicial
Activism in India. Courts went beyond the normal process of discharging their
obligations by accepting letters and telegrams received on plain papers as
maintainable claims against legal injury thereby opening the doors of judiciary not
just to the informed and the privileged section of the society but also to the have-nots
and the not so privileged. Infact they have allowed third-parties to file PILs for the
benefit of the others or public at large as was seen in the case of Dr. U Baxi v. State of
UP, AIR 1987 SC 191 wherein 2 professors of Delhi University wrote a letter to the
Supreme Court in connection with the inhuman and degrading living conditions of the
inmates of the protective home at Agra, which was in blatant violation of Art. 21 of
the Constitution. The Supreme Court treated this letter as a writ petition and permitted
the Professors to maintain a Public Interest Litigation for enforcing the constitutional
rights of the inmates.
Relevant Provisions:
In Indian law, Article 32 of the Indian constitution contains a tool which directly
connects the public with judiciary. The concept of Public Interest Litigation is in
consonance with the principles enshrined in Article 39A of the Constitution of India
to protect and deliver prompt social justice with the help of law. Numerous PILs have
been filed by people connected with the matter or as a third party for protection of
1
S.P Gupta v Union of India, AIR 1982 SC 1419
2
Bandhu Mukti Morcha v. Union of India, AIR 1984 SC 802
interest of public at large. A Public Interest Litigation may also be introduced in a
court of law by the court itself suo moto.
There have been PILs:
to safeguard the interest of prisoners in custody as per Art. 21 & 22 of the
Constitution.3
or, to redress the violation of the rights of working women under Art. 14, 15 &
21 of the Constitution.4
There are many other cases in which PILs have been filed to protect the interest of the
needy and the vulnerable through the mechanism of the PILs.
Although there are no specific provisions under which PILs can be filed there are
counter restrictions under which PILs should not be filed. These are:
1. Non-Disclosure of Material Facts: A petitioner approaching court must file a
Public Interest Litigation with clean hands and any misrepresentation or
suppression of material facts may lead to the dismissal of his Public Interest
Litigation.5
2. Political Issues: Such issues fall outside the reams of the courts unless and
until they require interpretation of some provision of the Constitution.6
3. Contractual Matters: In case of breach of contract, the petitioner must file a
regular suit and not a Public Interest Litigation unless there is a violation of
Art. 14 of the Constitution in any manner by a governmental authority.7
4. Principle of res judicata: If a matter has been settled by a competent court, the
same cannot be agitated by the same parties in any court once again.8
5. Delay in filing: There is no hard & fast rule with respect to the time limit
under which a Public Interest Litigation should be filed. It depends on the
facts of each individual case. In some cases, Courts have accepted the writs
even after a gap of 12 years and in some they were dismissed within 3 years.
Case Laws:
DK Basu v. State of West Bengal, AIR 1997 SC 610
The case refers to the custodial deaths and various forms of custodial torture and
cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment of prisoners and other persons being
questioned by the Police.
3
DK Basu v. State of West Bengal, AIR 1997 SC 610
4
Vishakha v. State of Rajasthan, AIR 1997 SC 3011
5
Abdul Gafour v. State of Madhya Pradesh, AIR 1968 MP 29
6
Gurudevadutta v. State of Maharashtra, AIR 2001 SC 1980
7
Stemons Public Communications Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India, AIR 2009 SC 1204
8
Dayarao v. State of UP, AIR 1961 SC 1457
Sh. DK Basu, the Executive Chairman of Legal Aid Services, wrote a letter to the CJI
after reading reports of many custodial deaths in leading newspapers. It was prayed
that it was imperative to develop “custody jurisprudence” and to formulate guidelines
for awarding compensation to the victim and in case of his death to the family
members.
This letter along with the published news items was admitted by the court as a Public
Interest Litigation and led to the laying down of guidelines with respect to arrest of
any person.
Thus a third person through the medium of a Public Interest Litigation became
instrumental in upholding the rights of people in custody.
Conclusion:
Judiciary in India, through the mechanism of Public Interest Litigation have brought
the judicial system to the doorstep of the common man by removing the technicalities
and expenses related to filing a legal suit. Judicial Activism has played a crucial role
here by allowing letters written on plain paper as Public Interest Litigation bringing
justice to large masses of people who otherwise would probably have never knocked
the doors of the judiciary owning to the cumbersome process and the expenses.
References:
1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Public_interest_litigation_in_India#:~:text=Public%20interest%20litigation
%20(PIL)%20refers,traditional%20rule%20of%20locus%20standi.
2) https://www.drishtiias.com/to-the-points/Paper2/public-interest-litigation
3) Constitutional Law of India by JN Pandey
4) The Constitution of India by NH Jhabvala
5) http://www.hellocounsel.com/public-interest-litigation/
