Today, On 14th May, The Supreme Court dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) that alleged Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal of misusing the names of Ambedkar and Bhagat Singh. The PIL claimed that Kejriwal used these names for political gains in the electoral context. However, the court found no merit in the allegations and rejected the PIL, stating it lacked substantial evidence to support its claims.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court, On Tuesday, dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) that requested the Indian government to take measures in order to prevent the exploitation of the names of national icons and freedom fighters for personal gain.
The court stated that the plea appeared to be politically motivated and questioned why, being turned into a “political arena.” The PIL claimed that Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal misused the images of freedom fighters Dr. B.R. Ambedkar and Bhagat Singh as backdrops during his public speeches.
Read Also: Arvind Kejriwal’s Defamation Case: Supreme Court Challenged Over Video Retweet
A bench consisting of Justices B R Gavai and Sandeep Mehta questioned,
“How has this Court turned into a political battleground?”
The petition withdrawn by the petitioner after detecting the court’s reluctance to proceed. The petitioner, identified as Vinay Pathak, argued that the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression should not permit individuals to exploit the images and names of national heroes and icons of the independence movement for personal benefits. He expressed concern that the plea being used to selectively target an individual.
The court expressed,
“The Petitioner found it deeply disconcerting and troubling to witness a modern-day politician likening himself to these unquestionably national heroes and icons.”
Furthermore, the Supreme Court pointed out that such matters, involving the potential misuse of names in public discourse, often fall within the domain of political and social debate rather than judicial intervention unless there are clear, actionable violations of specific legal provisions.
Read Also: PIL Against Arvind Kejriwal’s Arrest Not Maintainable: Delhi HC
The dismissal also reflects the court’s stance on avoiding involvement in politically charged issues without a strong legal basis, thereby upholding the principle that not all moral and ethical concerns justiciable.
The Supreme Court cautioned against the misuse of the PIL system for addressing grievances, essentially political in nature. It highlighted the necessity for the judiciary to remain a neutral arbiter and not to be drawn into political controversies unless a significant violation of law or constitutional provisions.