Public Interest Litigation (PIL) is a significant judicial innovation in India, allowing individuals and organizations to seek justice for the larger public good. It is available under Article 32 and Article 226 of the Indian Constitution, enabling direct access to the Supreme Court and High Courts. Initially conceptualized by Justice P.N. Bhagwati and Justice Krishna Iyer, PIL serves as a medium for enforcing fundamental rights and promoting social justice.

What is Public Interest Litigation?

Public Interest Litigation refers to legal action undertaken for public welfare rather than personal gain. It allows any socially conscious person or organization to file a petition on behalf of disadvantaged individuals who cannot approach the court themselves. PIL has played a vital role in strengthening democracy, ensuring accountability of government actions, and promoting social change.

Public Interest Litigation as a Tool of Social Justice

Ensuring Fundamental Rights

One of the core objectives of Public Interest Litigation is to safeguard fundamental rights. By filing a PIL under Article 32 and Article 226, individuals can directly seek relief from the Supreme Court or High Courts.

Strengthening Directive Principles

PIL aligns with Article 39A, which promotes equal justice and free legal aid. Courts have proactively used PILs to address economic and social disparities, ensuring that marginalized communities receive legal protection.

Judicial Activism and Accountability

PIL empowers the judiciary to take suo motu cognizance of cases that require urgent attention. It has been instrumental in addressing government inaction, corruption, and human rights violations.

Example:

During the Covid-19 pandemic, the Supreme Court intervened to review the government’s vaccination policy, ensuring better access to vaccines.

Cost-Effective Legal Remedy

Unlike traditional legal procedures, Public Interest Litigation involves minimal expenses. Courts have even accepted letters, newspaper reports, and postcards as PIL petitions.

Example:

In Veena Sethi v. State of Bihar, a simple letter led to judicial intervention, ensuring justice for mentally ill undertrial prisoners in Hazaribagh Jail.

Civil Society Participation

PIL enables NGOs and activists to become active stakeholders in governance. Cases such as the Sabarimala Temple verdict and LGBTQ+ rights (Naz Foundation case) highlight the impact of PIL in promoting social inclusion.

Challenges and Misuse of Public Interest Litigation

Frivolous PILs for Publicity

Some individuals misuse Public Interest Litigation for personal gains and media attention. Courts have condemned such PILs as a sheer abuse of the judicial process.

Example:

The Bombay High Court dismissed a PIL challenging a government tender, calling it an attempt to pollute the PIL mechanism.

Harassment of Officials

Certain PILs are filed to intimidate bureaucrats and politicians, affecting their decision-making capabilities and creating unnecessary legal hurdles.

Judicial Overreach and Overburdening Courts

The increasing number of Public Interest Litigation cases has led to a strain on the judicial system, contributing to delayed justice and case pendency. With over 5 crore pending cases, courts struggle to balance PILs and regular litigation.

Judiciary vs. Legislature Conflict

Excessive judicial interference through PILs can disrupt the balance between the executive, legislature, and judiciary. Despite landmark PIL verdicts, some social issues remain unresolved.

Example:

The plight of undertrial prisoners persists despite several PILs addressing the issue over the past 40 years.

PILs Against Marginalized Groups

At times, Public Interest Litigation has been used against poor farmers and slum dwellers, forcing them to vacate land under the pretext of public welfare.

Way Forward: Regulating Public Interest Litigation

Strict Guidelines for Filing PILs

The Supreme Court has established clear guidelines to ensure that Public Interest Litigation is not misused. Courts should only entertain PILs where access to justice is compromised due to social or economic constraints.

Limiting Frivolous PILs

• Restrict the number of PILs filed by an individual.
  
  
• Direct the media to limit publicity around petitioners.
  
  
• Encourage PILs to be heard first at High Courts before reaching the Supreme Court.
  
  

Imposing Heavy Penalties

Courts should impose financial penalties on those filing frivolous PILs to discourage misuse.

Time-Bound Judgments

A fixed time frame for PIL verdicts will prevent delays and ensure faster resolution of public issues.

Conclusion

While Public Interest Litigation has revolutionized access to justice, its misuse must be controlled. Proper regulation, judicial restraint, and adherence to guidelines can ensure that PIL remains a powerful tool for social change rather than a mechanism for personal agendas.