The Supreme Court on Tuesday refused to entertain a public interest litigation seeking the removal of portraits of Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, a prominent Hindutva ideologue, from the Parliament and other public spaces.
The Constitution Bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice Vipul M. Pancholi cautioned the petitioner, a retired Indian Revenue Service officer, regarding the potential imposition of substantial costs for filing what the Court characterised as a frivolous petition.
The Bench ultimately permitted the petitioner to withdraw the plea.
The petition sought judicial directions for the removal of Savarkar’s portrait from the Central Hall of Parliament and other government-controlled premises, including official residences. In addition, it requested that the Court restrain the Union Government from conferring honours or recognition upon individuals against whom charges of grave criminal offences—such as assassination, sedition, or anti-national activities—have been framed and who have not been acquitted in a court of law.
During the proceedings, the Court scrutinized the petitioner’s professional background, questioning his career trajectory, including his last posting before retirement and any adverse departmental actions. The Bench noted that the petitioner was not physically present in court and sought to participate via video conference, citing financial constraints. Observing the incongruity between the petitioner’s prior senior civil service position and his inability to appear in person, the Court indicated that such PILs could constitute an abuse of the judicial process under Section 35 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, and the principle of locus standi in public interest litigation as established in S.P. Gupta v. Union of India (1981) and Subhash Kumar v. State of Bihar (1991).
The Court emphasised that PILs were intended to advance genuine public causes and not to pursue personal grievances or symbolic acts of protest. In the exercise of its discretion under Article 142 of the Constitution and the inherent powers of the Court under Order XXVII of the Supreme Court Rules, the Bench permitted the petitioner to withdraw the matter, thereby avoiding the imposition of exemplary costs.
The post Supreme Court dismisses plea seeking removal of Savarkar portrait from Parliament appeared first on India Legal.