Delhi High Court


Delhi High Court: In a PIL filed seeking a prohibition of affixing photographs of gods/goddesses on walls to prevent public urination, spitting on and littering around such sacred images, a Division Bench of Satish Chandra Sharma and Subramonium Prasad, JJ., held that the present case is not a fit case for this Court to exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 and the prayers sought for by the Petitioner cannot be granted by this Court.

On the petitioner relying on an order passed by the present Court acknowledging the menace created by public urination in Manoj Sharma v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi, W.P.(C.) 1969 of 2014 dated 26-03-2014, the Court noted that the aforesaid order has in clear terms stated that the solution to the menace of public urination lies elsewhere and not before the Court. This Court, exercising its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution, cannot pass the directions which are being sought in the present PIL.

The Court further noted that it is certainly not the duty of a Constitutional Court to regulate and monitor the movement of each citizen to see whether one indulges in public urination, spitting and littering. The concern raised by the petitioner would be better addressed by civic bodies and not by this Court.

The Court remarked that the petitioner, being aware of the aforesaid order, chose to file a fresh PIL, espousing it as a fresh cause, and it is certainly a frivolous PIL that has resulted in wasting valuable judicial time.

Thus, the Court held that the present case is a fit case to be dismissed with exemplary costs, however, being cognizant of the fact the Petitioner-in-person is a young practicing advocate, no cost was imposed.

[Gorang Gupta v. Govt of NCT of Delhi, 2022 SCC OnLine Del 4489, decided on 19-12-2022]

Advocates who appeared in this case :

Petitioner in person

Mr. Sanjana Nangia, Advocate for Mr. Sameer Vashisht, ASC for GNCTD;

Mr. Sanjay Vashishtha, Standing Counsel for MCD with Mr. Rahul Kumar, Mr. Yogesh Devnani, Advocates Ms. Sakshi Popli, Additional Standing Counsel for NDMC;

Mr. Tarveen Singh Nanda, Standing Counsel for Respondent 3.

*Arunima Bose, Editorial Assistant has reported this brief.

Must Watch

maintenance to second wife

bail in false pretext of marriage

right to procreate of convict

Criminology, Penology and Victimology book release

Join the discussion

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.