Jammu & Kashmir High Court dismisses Mehbooba Mufti’s PIL on undertrial prisoners, terms it politically motivated

The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh on Tuesday dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petition filed by former Chief Minister and PDP President Mehbooba Mufti seeking the repatriation of undertrial prisoners from Jammu and Kashmir who were lodged in jails outside the Union Territory [Mehbooba Mufti V/s Union of India].

The Court dismissed the plea after finding that it was filed to garner political advantage and so that Mufti could position herself as a crusader of justice for a particular demographic.

The Bench of Chief Justice Arun Palli and Justice Rajnesh Oswal observed that the PIL jurisdiction cannot be used as an instrument for gaining political leverage or transforming courts into forums for electoral campaigns.

"Public Interest Litigation cannot be allowed to be utilised as an instrument for advancing partisan or political agendas or transforming the Court into a political platform. Public Interest Litigation is also not a mechanism for gaining political leverage, and the Courts cannot serve as a forum for electoral campaigns. While political parties possess manifold legitimate avenues to engage with the electorate, courts cannot be employed as an instrument for achieving electoral advantage," the Court said.

Mufi had sought directions for the immediate transfer of all undertrial prisoners from Jammu and Kashmir who were detained in prisons outside the UT.

She also called for ancillary reliefs such as weekly family interactions, unrestricted lawyer-client meetings, constitution of oversight committees, monitoring by Legal Services Authorities, and reimbursement of travel expenses for family members of such prisoners.

She submitted that she had filed the PIL after several families of undertrial prisoners urged her to take up this cause.

However, the Court noted that Mufti failed to disclose particulars of any specific undertrial prisoner, the nature of cases involved, or to challenge any concrete transfer orders.

The Bench observed that detention of undertrials outside the UT is not a blanket measure, but that such transfers are case-specific orders passed by competent authorities.

The Court also observed that Public Interest Litigation, originally evolved to protect the rights of marginalised and vulnerable sections, has been increasingly misused and abused over time.

"Litigants began employing if for their personal gain, vengeance, or other ulterior, political purpose, which were not in alignment with the objectives of this extraordinary jurisdiction," it said.

It went on to observe that Mufti had miserably failed to specify the particulars of families and of those under-trial prisoners, whose cause she claimed to project through her petition.

The Court concluded that Mufti lacked the locus standi (legal standing) to espouse the cause of unnamed undertrial prisoners who themselves had not approached the Court or invoked available legal remedies.

Concluding that the PIL was misconceived and politically coloured, the High Court dismissed the petition.

Mufti was represented by Advocate Aditya Gupta.

The Central government were represented by Deputy Solicitor General of India TM Shamsi, with Advocate Faizan Majeed Ganaie.

Senior Additional Advocate General Mohsin S Qadri, Government Advocate Faheem Nisar Shah and Advocate Maha Majeed appeared for the Jammu and Kashmir authorities.

[Read Judgment]