HC imposes Rs 50k cost on advocate, petitioner for false PILs

The Delhi High Court today took a strong view towards filing of false PILs and imposed a cost of Rs 50,000 each on an advocate and a law student, who had fraudulently filed a petition on illegal constructions on behalf of a 57-year-old woman's NGO.

The court said it was shameful that such false petitions were being filed in the garb of public interest litigation and dismissed two PILs.

"This is so shameful. There are so many petitions like this," it said.

A bench of Acting Chief Justice Gita Mittal and Justice C Hari Shankar said, "We have every reason to believe that all is not well in this case" and the advocate cannot wash his hands of this now.

While one plea was filed on behalf of an NGO, J One Jan Samuh Seva Samiti, alleging unauthorised construction in several properties at Tughalkabad Extension, the other was filed in the name of the law student Akash Bansal with similar allegations against some other properties.

Following the filing of the pleas, the court had issued a notice to the South Delhi Municipal Corporation (SDMC) after some parts of the properties were also demolished.

The court dismissed the two PILs and imposed a cost of Rs 50,000 on Bansal and advocate Naveen Kumar Jha through whom both the petitions were filed on the same day. They both were present in the hearing.

It also pulled up the advocate when he tried to defend his acts and asked him not to make public speeches which have no place in the court of law.

The bench questioned them for filing the petitions alleging illegal and unauthorised constructions carried out only in a few properties whereas the whole colony was unauthorised.

The court came to know about the false filing of the petitions when the woman, Noor Bano, the president of the NGO, appeared before it in February and said neither she had neither filed the petition nor personally visited the properties.

Meanwhile, advocate Anuja Kapur, who was appointed as amicus curiae to assist Noor Bano in the case, filed an affidavit stating that the woman had nothing to do with this petition and misrepresentation was made before the court and the plea was false and frivolous.