The petitioner had moved the HC seeking directions to the Centre and J&K state government for “appropriate measures” of security along the pilgrimage route. Express
The Punjab and Haryana High Court Friday came down hard on a Mohali resident for filing a PIL in seeking investigation into the recent attack on Amarnath pilgrims in south Kashmir’s Anantnag district and observed that the matter does not fall within the jurisdiction of the High Court. A division bench of the High Court termed the petition an attempt to gain publicity and questioned the petitioner for not filing the PIL instead in the J&K High Court.
“Amarnath yatra is in J&K. How does Punjab and Haryana High Court have jurisdiction in it when they (J&K state) have their own High Court,” the division bench observed. Questioning the locus standi of the petitioner Viresh Shandilya — who claims to head organisations like Anti Terrorist Front India and Awaaz-e-Hindustan — the HC bench observed these are just publicity hungry groups and the petitioner does not seem to even have the resources to fight the litigation.
“We do not need your type of organisations for the integrity of the country,” the division bench observed after the counsels of Shandilya said it is an issue of national integrity and security of people who have to embark on the pilgrimage. “It is because of such groups, who are defunct, that we are facing problems with the integrity.”
Shandilya had moved the High Court seeking directions to the central government and J&K state government for “appropriate measures” of security along the pilgrimage route. Sandhilya in the petition has said that the attack, in which at least eight pilgrims were killed, has taken place despite the heightened security measures along the yatra route and intelligence inputs about possible attacks on the pilgrims.
The court also rebuked the petitioner for claiming that he was the owner of a newspaper without producing any proof of an academic degree in journalism. “You have shown income tax returns of a newspaper. How can you be running a newspaper without bachelors in journalism. You go on calling doctors and lawyers quacks but what about you,” the HC bench observed. The HC bench also advised the counsels of the petitioner to not undermine the dignity of advocates by taking up such cases.
“Don’t reduce lawyer profession to mere employee of the clients. They are professional and not who can be hired for money,” the division bench observed. Following the petitioner’s request to withdraw the PIL, the HC bench dismissed the case.
