Delhi High Court raps NGO for filing repeated PILs against mosques, dargahs

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday pulled up an organisation named Save India Foundation for repeatedly filing public interest litigation (PIL) petitions alleging encroachments by masjids and dargahs in the national capital.

A Division Bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia said that it did not appreciate the organisation’s conduct and that it was misusing the PIL jurisdiction of the Court. 

“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 and see some religious structure and file a PIL,” Chief Justice Upadhyaya remarked. 

He stressed that there were other ways to serve humanity. 

“Are you seeking your name in the Guinness Book of World Records? You do not see any other ill in society? People who are not getting clean water, people who are starving, that’s not seen by you? You only see the encroachment? Please do not misuse PILs like this. These petitions disturb us,” the Chief Justice said. 

Two PILs filed by the Save India Foundation were listed before the Court today. One of those referred to Jama Masjid and Madarsa Giri Nagar. It was stated that the structure encroached upon "green, secular" land belonging to the government. 

Advocate Umesh Chandra Sharma appeared for the petitioner organisation and said that even though complaints had been filed, no action was taken against the mosque. 

Meanwhile, advocate Sameer Vashisht appeared for the Delhi government and said that, as per the local authorities, the structure was an encroachment. 

Senior Advocate Sanjoy Ghose appeared for the Delhi Waqf Board and argued that the mosque was a notified structure and that the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) had also participated in the demarcation of the land. 

Ghose added that a single-judge of the High Court had also seen a pattern in the kind of pleas filed by the petitioner organisation and targeting of the religious structures of one community. 

After hearing the case for some time, the Court said that it will consider the case again on January 21.