Andhra Pradesh High Court Dismisses PIL Filed On Basis Of "WhatsApp Message" Alleging Misappropriation Of Funds By State Bar Council
The Andhra Pradesh High Court dismissed a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by an advocate alleging misappropriation of funds generated by the state's Bar Council based on information circulating on WhatsApp groups.The Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Dhiraj Singh Thakur and Justice R. Raghunandan Rao found the petition to be frivolous due to the petitioner's lack of knowledge...
The Andhra Pradesh High Court dismissed a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by an advocate alleging misappropriation of funds generated by the state's Bar Council based on information circulating on WhatsApp groups.
The Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Dhiraj Singh Thakur and Justice R. Raghunandan Rao found the petition to be frivolous due to the petitioner's lack of knowledge about the applicable law and their reliance on unverified information.
“It can therefore be clearly seen that the present petition was filed casually by the petitioner as a knee jerk reaction on the receipt of the WhatsApp messages circulating amongst various groups without verifying its authenticity and without in the least making any effort to seek clarity in regard thereto.”
The case stemmed from the petitioner's claim that the Bar Council was misappropriating funds collected through the sale of stamps meant for advocate welfare. The petitioner based this allegation on a discrepancy they observed between the amount collected and the amount reflected in the Bar Council's records.
This discrepancy they claimed, was derived from information circulating on WhatsApp groups.
However, the court found the petition to be flawed for several reasons. Firstly, the petitioner was unaware of Section 12-A of the Andhra Pradesh Advocates' Welfare Fund Act, 1987 which mandates that only a portion of the collected stamp money goes to the Bar Council, with the remaining amount allocated to the Advocates' Clerks' Welfare Fund. This explains the apparent discrepancy the petitioner identified.
“On a specific question addressed to the petitioner appearing in person, we were informed that he did not know that Section 12-A at all existed in the Andhra Pradesh Advocates' Welfare Fund Act, 1987 and that the amount which was receivable by the Bar Council of State of Andhra Pradesh was to be less than the amount which was actually collected on the sale of stamps.”
Secondly, the court criticized the petitioner for filing the PIL based solely on unverified information obtained from WhatsApp messages. The Court was also inclined to impose a cost of Rs.50,000/-, however, upon the request of the petitioner/advocate the cost was waived.
“We would have imposed costs of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) on the petitioner appearing in person, however, the petitioner pleaded that no such costs be imposed upon him inasmuch as he was an Advocate practicing in mofussil Court and would be unable to pay the same. Be that as it may, the writ petition (public interest litigation) filed by the petitioner is totally frivolous and is, accordingly, dismissed. No order as to costs.”
Writ Petition (Public Interest Litigation) No: 45 OF 2024
Counsel for the Petitioner(s) :Muli Venkata Bali Reddy (Party In Person)
Counsel for the Respondents : GP for Law Legislative Affairs – R1, K. Maheswara Rao, SC for Bar Council of India – R2, T. D. Phani Kumar represented by. Veera Reddy – R3 & The Deputy Solicitor General of India - R4.