POSTED BY Sundeep Dougal ON Jul 15, 2011 AT 23:37 IST ,  Edited At: Jul 15, 2011 23:37 IST

Today's Indian Express had an article under the headline, Have the Chamars no right, asks SC, which went on to note:

In a startling observation, the bench said that “so far the courts have been used only for the purpose of vindicating the rights of the wealthy and the affluent.”

“It is only these privileged classes which have been able to approach the courts for protecting their vested interests. It is only the moneyed who have so far had the golden key to unlock the doors of justice,” the court said in a July 12 judgment.

...

A Bench of Justices G S Singhvi and A K Ganguly, in a 45-page judgment, said ... “those who are decrying public interest litigation do not seem to realise that courts are not meant only for the rich and the well-to-do, for the landlord and the gentry, for the business magnate and the industrial tycoon but they exist also for the poor and the down-trodden, the have-nots and the handicapped and the half-hungry millions of our countrymen”.

“There is a misconception in the minds of some lawyers, journalists and men in public life that public interest litigation is unnecessarily cluttering up the files of the court and adding to the already staggering arrears of cases which are pending for long years and it should not therefore be encouraged by the court. This is, to our mind, a totally perverse view smacking of elitist and status quoist approach,” the court said.

“If the sugar barons and the alcohol kings have the fundamental right to carry on their business and to fatten their purses by exploiting the consuming public, have the Chamars belonging to the lowest strata of society no fundamental right to earn an honest living through their sweat and toil?” the court said.

“The former can approach the courts with a formidable army of distinguished lawyers paid in four or five figures per day and if their right to exploit is upheld against the government under the label of fundamental right, the courts are praised for their boldness and courage and their independence and fearlessness are applauded and acclaimed. But if the fundamental right of the poor and helpless victims of injustice is sought to be enforced by public interest litigation, the so-called champions of human rights frown upon it as waste of time of the highest court in the land, which, according to them, should not engage itself in such small and trifling matters,” it said. 

The "startling observation", the passages quoted above —and also the headline— it was quite er... startling to note, it turns out, were all from a 1982 case cited in the SC's judgment of July 12, viz. People’s Union for Democratic Rights v. Union of India (1982).  

Following is the relevant paragraph from the Supreme Court's July 12 judgment in Delhi Jal Board vs National Campaign for Dignity and Rights of Sewerage and Allied Workers & others:

16.This Court has time and again emphasized the importance of the petitions filed  pro bono publico for protection of the rights of less fortunateand vulnerable sections of the society. In People’s Union for DemocraticRights v. Union of India (1982) 3 SCC 235, this Court said:

...The rule of law does not mean that the protection of the law must be available only to a fortunate few or that the law should be allowed to be prostituted by the vested interests for protecting and upholding the status quo under the guise of enforcement of their civil and political rights. The poor too have civil and political rights and the rule of law is meant for them also, though today it exists only on paper and not in reality. If the sugar barons and the alcohol kings have the fundamental right to carry on their business and to fatten their purses by exploiting the consuming public, have the chamars belonging to the lowest strata of society no fundamental right to earn an honest living through their sweat and toil? The former can approach the courts with a formidable army of distinguished lawyers paid in four or five figures per day and if their right to exploit is upheld against the Government under the label of fundamental right, the courts are praised for their boldness and courage and their independence and fearlessness are applauded and acclaimed. But, if the fundamental right of the poor and helpless victims of injustice is sought to be enforced by public interest litigation, the so-called champions of human rights frown upon it as waste of time of the highest court in the land, which, according to them, should not engage itself in such small and trifling matters. Moreover, these self-styled human rights activists forget that civil and political rights, priceless and invaluable as they are for freedom and democracy, simply do not exist for the vast masses of our people. Large numbers of men, women and children who constitute the bulk of our population are today living a sub-human existence in conditions of abject poverty; utter grinding poverty has broken their back and sapped their moral fibre. They have no faith in the existing social and economic system. 

Public interest litigation, as we conceive it, is essentially a cooperative or collaborative effort on the part of the petitioner, the State or public authority and the court to secure observance of the constitutional or legal rights, benefits and privileges conferred upon the vulnerable sections of the community and to reach social justice to them. The State or public authority against whom public interest litigation is brought should be as much interested in ensuring basic human rights, constitutional as well as legal, to those who are in a socially and economically disadvantaged position, as the petitioner who brings the public interest litigation before the court. The State or public authority which is arrayed as a respondent in public interest litigation should, in fact, welcome it, as it would give it an opportunity to right a wrong or to redress an injustice done to the poor and weaker sections of the community whose welfare is and must be the prime concern of the State or the public authority. 

There is a misconception in the minds of some lawyers, journalists and men in public life that public interest litigation is unnecessarily cluttering up the files of the court and adding to the already staggering arrears of cases which are pending for long years and it should not therefore be encouraged by the court. This is, to our mind, a totally perverse view smacking of elitist and status quo ist approach. Those who are decrying public interest litigation do not seem to realise that courts are not meant only for the rich and the well-to-do, for the landlord and the gentry, for the business magnate and the industrial tycoon, but they exist also for the poor and the down-trodden, the have-nots and the handicapped and the half-hungry millions of our countrymen. So far the courts have been used only for the purpose of vindicating the rights of the wealthy and the affluent. It is only these privileged classes which have been able to approach the courts for protecting their vested interests. It is only the moneyed who have so far had the golden key to unlock the doors of justice. ………No State has a right to tell its citizens that because a large number of cases of the rich and the well-to-do are pending in our courts, we will not help the poor to come to the courts for seeking justice until the staggering load of cases of people who can afford, is disposed of. The time has now come when the courts must become the courts for the poor and struggling masses of this country. They must shed their character as upholders of the established order and the status quo. They must be sensitised to the need of doing justice to the large masses of people to whom justice has been denied by a cruel and heartless society for generations. The realisation must come to them that social justice is the signature tune of our Constitution and it is their solemn duty under the Constitution to enforce the basic human rights of the poor and vulnerable sections of the community and actively help in the realisation of the constitutional goals.

In fact, the July 12 judgment by itself deserves to not just be quoted at length but ought to be read in full:

SC_20110712

POSTED BY Sundeep Dougal ON Jul 15, 2011 AT 23:37 IST ,  Edited At: Jul 15, 2011 23:37 IST
Follow us on Twitter for all updates, like us on Facebook for important and fun stuff
TRANSLATE INTO:


Post a Comment
Share your thoughts
You are not logged in, please log in or register
Must See
Daily Mail
Digression
6/D-107
Jul 19, 2011
07:32 PM

"The poor too have civil and political rights and the rule of law is meant for them also."

Why don't the Supreme court realize that its the judicial system that is at fault most of the time by allowing the criminals to escape using various holes in the law and due to delayed justice ? Does anyone in this country seriously believe in starting a judicial proceeding and expect it to complete within a timeline so that justice is delivered and not delayed ? Delayed justice is denied justice.. as in 1984 case where the culpris are still roaming freely..

Why don;t the judiciary look upon itself and try to correct itself before enroaching the powers of the executive? Whatever the investigation is done by the police and other agencies, it finally comes to the courts to decide. lengthy delays and corrupt judges are no better than corrupt politicians..

"No State has a right to tell its citizens that because a large number of cases of the rich and the well-to-do are pending in our courts, we will not help the poor to come to the courts for seeking justice until the staggering load of cases of people who can afford, is disposed of. The time has now come when the courts must become the courts for the poor and struggling masses of this country.

For a start, Why don't the supreme court stop all the vacations for all the courts in this country which is a british policy to avoid summer in India and return to their country ? Somewhere I read most courts operate only for 210 days in a year!! this will the least number of days by any employer I think... and that too with so many cases pending for clearance..

Judiciary should first look inwards and try to clear the mess it is in.. the it can lecture the executive on ideologies..

Rajesh
Bangalore, India
5/D-81
Jul 18, 2011
05:32 PM

When political class fail to keep basic integrity of  governance...glad judiciary is waking up! at least we are saved of anarchy......that's what common people think

madhukar
hyderabad, India
4/D-146
Jul 17, 2011
10:51 PM

Court can lament that but sad truth is that indian democracy as it exists today is for elite, by elite and of elite only.

anshul
indore, india
3/D-46
Jul 17, 2011
10:03 AM

The Government is the biggest litigant and as rightly pointed out by the court uses it' nearly unlimited resources to harass and wear out those who have grievances against the state. I am particularly happy that in the present case, the SC thought fit to double the compensation ordered by the HC.

The next step would be to make the concerned bureaucrats who file such frivolous litigation with a view to denying people their benefits pay out of their pockets.

Bonita
Chennai, India
2/D-18
Jul 16, 2011
06:34 AM

 “The most unfortunate part of the scenario is that whenever one of the three constituents of the State i e., judiciary, has issued directions for ensuring that the right to equality, life and liberty no longer remains illusory for those who suffer from the handicaps of poverty, illiteracy and ignorance and directions are given for implementation of the laws enacted by the legislature for the benefit of the have-nots, a theoretical debate is started by raising the bogey of judicial activism or judicial overreach,” a Bench of Justices G S Singhvi and A K Ganguly said.

It said that the courts like the Supreme Court and High Courts have a duty to entertain PILs and petitions filed by bonafide individuals and NGOs espousing the cause of the underprivileged.

MANISH BANERJEE
KOLKATA, India
Order by
Order by
PhotosNewsBlogsLatest
Short Takes
click for more
recent tags
Assembly Elections
Baba Ramdev
BJP
Congress
Corruption
Haryana
Health- Medicine- Fitness
Levity
Maharashtra
Maharashtra Navanirman Sena (MNS)
Media
NCP
Shiv Sena
TV
Websites
 
bloggers
A. Sanzgiri
Boria Majumdar
Buzz
Dr Mohammad Taqi
Freya Dasgupta
G. Rajaraman
K.V. Bapa Rao
Maheshwer Peri
Namrata Joshi
Omar Ali
Our Readers Write Back
OWD
Poster
Prarthna Gahilote
Shefalee Vasudev
Sundeep Dougal
Sunil Menon
ARCHIVES
Go
SMTWTFS
1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031
recent comments
AIADMK chief J Jayalalithaa who was sentenced to four-year...
Poll Started on: Oct 17, 2014
More...
As if two sitting governors, a high-profile US Attorney...
Buzz
More...


ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SUBSCRIBE | ADVERTISING RATES | COPYRIGHT & DISCLAIMER | COMMENTS POLICY

OUTLOOK TOPICS:    a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z  0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9   
Or just type in a few initial letters of a topic: