The Patna High Court imposed a Cost of Rs.10,000/- on the Petitioner and dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed challenging the appointment of the Private Respondent who has been allowed to work in a police station by the SHO of the said police station without any appointment order.
The petitioner had in the petition itself produced the FIR registered against the Private respondent.
The petitioner had sought for constituting a high level SIT to ascertain the truth behind such frauds committed in the State of Bihar.
It is to be pointed out that the allegation made is only against one such person being appointed against whom an FIR was registered; based on which unsubstantiated allegation is made of such appointments having been made all over the State.
Only to ascertain facts about such appointment made and the further action, the High Court directed the State to file a counter affidavit.
The State has filed a counter affidavit pointing out that an FIR was registered against the Private respondent on 31.10.2021 and on the very next day he was arrested. He is no more in employment. The SHO who permitted the Private respondent’s joining has also been proceeded against by a Departmental Enquiry (Proceeding).
The Division Bench of Chief Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice Rajiv Roy are surprised that omnibus prayer for appointment of a SIT is made in the year 2023 based on the allegations against which there is a proceeding already initiated by the State Government.
The Bench find the Public Interest Litigation to be a clear abuse of process of Court. The petitioner is aware of the case registered against the Private respondent and since the Private respondent is also arrested on the next day, the petitioner knows that the Private respondent is no longer employed in the police station. There are allegations made against the SP and Sergeant Major without impleading them in their personal capacity. This is all the more relevant since the alleged incident occurred two years back.
The High Court would not entertain the PIL , supervise the investigation nor the Court convinced that there is any material brought on record to appoint a SIT. The PIL is filed regarding an incident that occurred two years back, in which action has been initiated by the Department, making prayers for appointment of a SIT, which is more in the nature of a publicity induced litigation.
“We dismiss the writ petition with exemplary cost of Rs. 10,000/- to be recovered from the petitioner by the Bihar State Legal Services Authority in the same manner, as is proceeded with for recovery of ‘revenue due on land’; if not paid voluntarily within a period of one month”, the order reads.