In public interest

Justice Sarosh Homi Kapadia, the senior-most judge in the Supreme Court, succeeded Justice K.G. Justice Kapadia, who will be the first CJI born after Independence, will have a tenure of two years and four months, as Supreme Court judges retire at the age of 65. It will be of interest to examine the CJI's views on PILs in the light of the Supreme Court's judgment in the Balwant Singh Chaufal case, delivered on January 18. The Supreme Court is monitoring the implementation of its directives, and the case came up for hearing on May 3 before the Bench of Justice Dalveer Bhandari and Justice Gyan Sudha Misra. In its January 18 judgment, the Supreme Court Bench, comprising Justices Dalveer Bhandari and Mukundakam Sharma, laid down the following guidelines to be followed while admitting PILs: The courts should prima facie verify the credentials of the petitioner before entertaining a PIL; prima facie be satisfied about the correctness of the contents of the petition; be satisfied that substantial public interest is involved; ensure that the petition that involves larger public interest, gravity and urgency is given priority; before entertaining a PIL, ensure that it is aimed at the redress of genuine public harm or public injury; ensure that there is no personal gain, private motive or oblique motive behind filing the PIL; and, finally, ensure that petitions filed by busybodies for extraneous and ulterior motives are discouraged by imposing exemplary costs or by adopting similar novel methods.