NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Friday advised an advocate, who had filed 25 separate public interest litigations (PILs) on a wide range of issues, to first engage with authorities instead of directly approaching the court.
The observations came when advocate Sachin Gupta, appearing as petitioner-in-person, sought permission to withdraw all his pending pleas before a bench headed by Chief Justice Surya Kant, along with Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi.
“You concentrate on the profession. You should approach the authorities and make them wiser on certain issues instead of rushing to the court,” the bench told Gupta.
The court emphasised that, as a member of the Bar, Gupta should adopt an analytical approach to identify issues and sensitise the concerned authorities before invoking the court’s jurisdiction. It added that judicial intervention could be sought at an appropriate stage if required.
The bench subsequently allowed the withdrawal of all 25 PILs listed for hearing.
The petitions filed by Gupta covered a broad spectrum of issues. These included demands for framing a policy on a common link language for official use, creating legal awareness programmes on television, regulating the use of chemicals in soaps to protect skin health, and introducing measures for the upliftment of disadvantaged groups such as beggars and transgender persons.
The development follows the court’s earlier criticism of Gupta’s petitions. On March 9, the apex court had dismissed five of his PILs as “frivolous,” including one seeking a scientific study on whether onion and garlic contain “tamasic” energy. In a sharp remark, the bench had questioned whether such petitions were drafted “in the middle of the night,” terming them vague and baseless.
On the same day, four other pleas filed by Gupta — including one seeking regulation of allegedly harmful content in alcohol and tobacco products — were also dismissed.
The court’s latest observations underline the need for responsible litigation and encourage legal practitioners to pursue administrative remedies before seeking judicial intervention.
(With inputs from PTI)