2024-08-04 16:47:52
New Delhi : Any issue, related to any field, whether it is related to the jurisdiction of the executive or the legislature, it has become a trend to appeal directly to the Supreme Court in the name of PIL. Many times, such PILs do not have public interest but are more of a publicity stunt. The Supreme Court also imposes fines or severely reprimands those who file such PILs from time to time. Now look at a recent case. A PIL was filed in the Supreme Court demanding the elimination of superstitions. The apex court refused to accept the petition saying that it does not have a cure for every disease, after which the petitioner withdrew it. In the PIL filed in the Supreme Court, a demand was made to direct the government to take steps to eliminate superstitions. The judges said that the court cannot decide how to develop scientific thinking among the people.
This Public Interest Litigation (PIL) was filed by famous lawyer Ashwini Upadhyay. He said that every year hundreds of people lose their lives due to superstition. He requested the court to direct the governments to take steps to develop scientific thinking among the people.
A bench headed by Chief Justice (CJI) D.Y. Chandrachud said that the court’s order cannot develop scientific thinking among people. The bench said, ‘We cannot direct what should be taught to students in schools. This comes under the policy area of experts of the government’s education department.’ The CJI said, ‘Students are already burdened with very detailed syllabus of studies. We cannot add to it by judicial order.’
When the petitioner said that it was a genuine PIL for social reforms, the CJI said, ‘Filing PILs in constitutional courts does not make one a social reformer. You can work at the grassroots level to educate people against superstitions.’ All efforts by Upadhyay to persuade the court failed, following which he withdrew his petition.