The Supreme Court disapproved of a petitioner’s PIL on Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose’s death, citing “reckless and irresponsible allegations” against historical figures. Justices raised doubts about the petitioner’s motives and the authenticity of claims, noting even Mahatma Gandhi was targeted.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: Today(on1st April), The Supreme Court expressed its disapproval towards a petitioner who brought forth a public interest litigation (PIL) concerning the mysterious death of the celebrated freedom fighter Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose.
The judges criticized the plea for its “reckless and irresponsible allegations” directed at historical figures who have passed away, highlighting a concerning trend in how litigation is being used to address historical events.
The bench, comprising Justice Surya Kant and K V Viswanathan, pointed out that the plea did not even spare Mahatma Gandhi, one of India’s most revered figures, from its allegations. This raised questions regarding the petitioner’s motives and the authenticity of his claims.
The court emphasized that “the bona fide of the petitioner is required to be tested” to ascertain the legitimacy of the accusations made in the lawsuit.
The petitioner, identified as Pinak Pani Mohanty, serves as the Cuttack district secretary for the World Human Rights Protection Organisation (India). The court inquired about his contributions to public interest and human rights, questioning-
“Who is behind you?” and further probing, “What have you done for public interest” and “What have you done for human rights of people? We have to test your bona fide,”
to evaluate the sincerity and integrity behind his allegations.
The Supreme Court has asked Mohanty to submit an affidavit to examine his dedication to societal welfare and human rights advocacy. This document should outline his past activities, particularly regarding human rights, demonstrating his commitment to benefiting society. This action emphasizes the court’s insistence on ensuring that legal actions, especially those filed as public interest litigations, are genuinely motivated by concern for the community’s welfare rather than by ulterior motives or unfounded accusations.
ALSO READ: Delhi HC: Govt. Must Implement Accessibility Guidelines for Disabled in Cinemas & OTT by July 2024
The court has scheduled another hearing for the case in four weeks, allowing the petitioner to compile and submit the required affidavit within this timeframe. This delay also enables the court to thoroughly evaluate the petitioner’s involvement in public welfare and human rights matters. It ensures that the legal process is not misused to tarnish the reputations of historical figures or to pursue personal agendas in the name of public interest.
