New Delhi: The Delhi High Court on Wednesday strongly criticised Save India Foundation for repeatedly filing public interest litigation (PIL) petitions alleging encroachments by mosques and dargahs in the national capital, observing that the organisation was misusing the court’s jurisdiction, Bar and Bench reported.
A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia said it did not appreciate the conduct of the organisation and remarked that its petitions appeared to selectively target one category of religious structures.
“You see only one kind of encroachment? We do not appreciate this. You are misusing the court’s process. Every week you go around the city, find some religious structure, and file a PIL,” Chief Justice Upadhyaya said.
The Chief Justice further noted that there were several other pressing issues in society that warranted judicial attention.
“Are you seeking your name in the Guinness Book of World Records? You do not see any other ill in society? People who do not get clean water, people who are starving—none of that is seen by you? You only see encroachments? Please do not misuse PILs like this. These petitions disturb us,” he observed.
Two PILs filed by Save India Foundation were listed before the court on Wednesday, one of which pertained to Jama Masjid and Madarsa Giri Nagar. The petitioner alleged that the structure had encroached upon “green, secular” government land.
Appearing for the organisation, advocate Umesh Chandra Sharma submitted that complaints had been made earlier, but no action had been taken against the mosque.
However, advocate Sameer Vashisht, representing the Delhi government, informed the court that according to local authorities, the structure was indeed an encroachment.
Senior advocate Sanjoy Ghose, appearing for the Delhi Waqf Board, countered the claim by stating that the mosque was a notified structure and that the Delhi Development Authority had also participated in the demarcation of the land.
Ghose also drew the court’s attention to earlier observations by a single judge of the High Court, who had noted a pattern in the petitions filed by the organisation, stating that they appeared to target religious structures belonging to one particular community.
After hearing the arguments, the court said it would take up the matter again on January 21.