Model Answer
0 min readIntroduction
Public Interest Litigation (PIL), originating in India in the 1980s, represents a significant departure from the traditional adversarial legal system. Initially conceived to provide access to justice to the marginalized and disadvantaged, PIL allows any individual or organization to approach the courts on behalf of those unable to do so themselves. It has been instrumental in addressing issues of human rights, environmental protection, and governmental accountability. However, the very openness that makes PIL a powerful tool also renders it susceptible to misuse, necessitating a careful balancing act by the judiciary. The statement highlights this duality – PIL as both a ‘boon’ and requiring judicial oversight to prevent its degeneration.
The Boon of PIL: Advancing Social Justice
PIL has demonstrably served as a boon in several ways:
- Access to Justice: It has empowered marginalized sections of society – the poor, women, minorities – to seek redressal of their grievances.
- Accountability of Public Authorities: PIL has forced public authorities to be more transparent and accountable in their actions. Landmark cases like Vishnu Bhagat v. State of Maharashtra (1998) regarding prison reforms exemplify this.
- Environmental Protection: PIL has played a crucial role in environmental conservation. The M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (1987) case concerning pollution in the Ganga River is a prime example.
- Protection of Fundamental Rights: It has been used effectively to enforce fundamental rights, particularly Article 21 (Right to Life and Personal Liberty).
The Shadow Side: Misuse of PIL
Despite its benefits, PIL has faced criticism for being misused:
- Frivolous Petitions: Courts have been burdened with petitions lacking genuine public interest, often motivated by personal vendettas or publicity stunts.
- Political Motivations: PILs are sometimes filed with political agendas, aiming to embarrass the government or specific individuals.
- Judicial Overreach: Excessive intervention by the judiciary in policy matters, blurring the lines between judicial review and governance.
- Commercial PILs: Instances of individuals or organizations filing PILs for financial gain or to settle commercial disputes.
The Supreme Court in Jan Sangharsh v. State of Haryana (1991) cautioned against the use of PIL for settling personal scores.
The Court’s Duty: Preventing Misuse
The courts have recognized the need to prevent the misuse of PIL and have taken several steps:
- Imposing Costs: Courts can impose hefty costs on petitioners filing frivolous or malicious PILs.
- Dismissing PILs: PILs lacking genuine public interest or based on insufficient evidence can be dismissed.
- Strict Scrutiny: Courts are increasingly scrutinizing PILs to ensure they meet the criteria of genuine public interest.
- Guidelines for PILs: The Supreme Court has issued guidelines for filing and handling PILs, emphasizing the need for bona fide intentions and verifiable information.
The court’s role is not to stifle legitimate PILs but to ensure that the process is not abused. A balance must be struck between upholding the right to approach the court and preventing its misuse for ulterior motives. The Supreme Court’s intervention in the 2G spectrum allocation case (2012) demonstrates proactive judicial oversight, while simultaneously highlighting the need for caution against overreach.
| Aspect | PIL as a Boon | PIL & Misuse |
|---|---|---|
| Objective | Provide access to justice, protect rights | Exploitation for personal/political gain |
| Impact | Increased accountability, environmental protection | Burden on judiciary, delays in genuine cases |
| Judicial Response | Encouragement of legitimate petitions | Imposition of costs, dismissal of frivolous petitions |
Conclusion
Public Interest Litigation remains a vital instrument for social justice and good governance in India. While its potential for misuse is undeniable, dismissing it as merely a source of problems would be a grave error. The courts have a crucial responsibility to act as gatekeepers, ensuring that PIL is used for its intended purpose – to serve the public interest – and not as a tool for personal or political gain. A judicious approach, balancing accessibility with accountability, is essential to preserve the boon of PIL while mitigating its potential drawbacks.
Answer Length
This is a comprehensive model answer for learning purposes and may exceed the word limit. In the exam, always adhere to the prescribed word count.