"Reliance Placed On A Tweet, It Is Publicity Interest Litigation": Delhi High Court Imposes 50K Cost In Plea Alleging Misuse Of Public Money By Delhi Govt.
Dealing with a plea wherein the petitioner alleged that he was under an apprehension that the Delhi Government was misusing the public money, the Delhi High Court on Tuesday (May 4) dismissed the plea with 50K cost.The Bench of Chief Justice D. N. Patel and Justice Jasmeet Singh noted that reliance had been placed by the petitioner, for filing the writ petition on a 'tweet' by somebody else...
Dealing with a plea wherein the petitioner alleged that he was under an apprehension that the Delhi Government was misusing the public money, the Delhi High Court on Tuesday (May 4) dismissed the plea with 50K cost.
The Bench of Chief Justice D. N. Patel and Justice Jasmeet Singh noted that reliance had been placed by the petitioner, for filing the writ petition on a 'tweet' by somebody else on 'twitter'.
"It appears that this is not public interest litigation at all, but a publicity interest litigation...This type of allegation is fully misconceived and baseless and only made with a view to create sensation and to get publicity."
The plea before the Court
It was submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that the Delhi Government was siphoning away the public money. It was further submitted by the counsel that looking at a 'tweet' by somebody else on 'twitter', the petitioner was under an apprehension that the Government was misusing the public money.
In this backdrop, it was prayed that:
- Direct the Delhi Government to give clarification regarding the amount collected in the Lieutenant Governor/Chief Minister Relief Fund for COVID-19 relief and details of the expenditures made thereof;
- Direct a thorough court-monitored investigation into siphoning off funds donated by the public in the Lieutenant Governor/Chief Minister Relief Fund for COVID-19 relief for other purposes.
Court's observations
When the Court raised a query as to whether the petitioner had ever gathered information under the Right to Information Act, 2005, the answer given by the learned counsel for the petitioner was that he had never applied for information under the RTI Act regarding any details about the fund in question much less for the misuse of the fund in question.
To this, the Court remarked,
"Thus, it appears that without doing any homework, this petition has been preferred. The petitioner has solely relied upon a tweet of somebody else to put allegations against the respondents that they are misusing the public fund."
Therefore, finding no reason to entertain the writ petition, the same was accordingly dismissed with costs of Rs.50,000/- to be deposited by the petitioner with the Delhi State Legal Service Authority within four weeks. The amount will be utilized for the program 'Access to Justice'.
In related news, the Delhi High Court on Monday dismissed a PIL seeking directions for evolving and enforcing the Code of Ethics/Regulations on the TV News Channels for reporting news articles of "sensitive nature" including reporting of mass scale deaths, sufferings by the people in the wake of second Covid wave and to restrain the broadcasters or TV channels from spreading negativity, sense of insecurity towards life, alarm, injury, harm, suffering, damage, etc. while doing so.
Similarly, observing that the Court can't compel the respondents to draft law or policy for the compulsory donation of plasma, the Delhi High Court on Tuesday (May 6) dismissed a 'baseless and frivolous petition' with costs of Rs.10,000/.
The Bench of Chief Justice D. N. Patel and Justice Jasmeet Singh remarked,
"We can neither compel the respondents to draft law or policy for a compulsory donation of plasma nor we can give any direction to persons, who have recovered from Covid-19 after plasma therapy, to donate plasma for the benefit of other patients suffering from Covid-19. This is a baseless and frivolous petition"
Case title - Pratyush Prasanna v. State of NCT Delhi
Read Order