Contempt Laws: Keep filing PIL petitions before different courts with oblique motive could amount to contempt

Standard

That is what it seems to have persuaded Supreme Court to issue notice as to why contempt proceedings should not be started or why alternatively he should not be fined with examplary costs.

It appeared to Supreme Court in case of Kalyneshwari vs Union of India 2011(1)SCALE 651 that the petitioner who had filed number of PIL to ban asbestos mining had been abusing process of court.

So while dismissing above petition, Supreme Court has issued notice as above on 21.1.2011. I have yet not checked or read final outcome of the matter.

In my view, I am personally against the use of Contempt Act against PIL Petitioners. As a collateral damage, this can discourage genuine public spirited people also from coming to court with a PIL. And this may not be good in long run

Haresh Raichura
18/6/2012

Weak Laws: How much amount Government can spend to sponsor Religious Activities?

Standard
Art.27 of the Constitution of India, prohibits governments to spend money to sponsor one or other religious activities.

In case of Prafull Goradia Vs U.O.I, 2011 (1) SCALE 761 on page 764 in para 9, Supreme Court observed that if substantial amount of tax collected by Government (i.e. 25% ) is spent on any particular religion, it will violate Art.27. But if small amount is spent, it will not  violate Art.27

In my personal view, above views is not based on sound legal reasoning.

Haresh Raichura
17/6/2012