JHARKHAND PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION (JPSC)

📅 Category: Polity | Judiciary | Fundamental Rights

📌 Keywords

• Public Interest Litigation (PIL)
• Judicial Review
• Article 32
• Article 226
• Fundamental Rights
• Police Accountability
• Constitutional Remedies

🎯 Why is this Important?

The Supreme Court’s hearing on the pellet gun case demonstrates the importance of Public Interest Litigation (PIL) as a constitutional tool to protect Fundamental Rights and examine the legality of executive actions. It highlights how the judiciary balances individual liberties with the State’s duty to maintain public order.

Background

1. What is Public Interest Litigation (PIL)?

Public Interest Litigation (PIL) is a judicial mechanism that allows any public-spirited citizen or organization to approach the Supreme Court or a High Court on behalf of people whose rights are affected, even if the petitioner is not personally aggrieved.

The primary objective of PIL is to ensure access to justice, protect Fundamental Rights, and promote good governance.

2. Constitutional Basis

3. What is Judicial Review?

Judicial Review is the power of constitutional courts to examine whether executive or legislative actions are consistent with the Constitution.

It acts as a safeguard against arbitrary exercise of State power.

4. What is Locus Standi?

Ordinarily, only a person directly affected by a legal wrong can approach the court.

Under PIL, this rule is relaxed, allowing public-spirited individuals, NGOs, and social organizations to seek judicial intervention in matters affecting the larger public interest.

Recent Development

PIL Challenging the Use of Pellet Guns

A Public Interest Litigation was filed before the Supreme Court questioning the use of pellet guns by law enforcement agencies during civilian protests.

Issues Raised

The petition argued that:

• Pellet guns may cause serious and permanent injuries.
• Their indiscriminate use could violate Article 21 (Right to Life).
• Excessive force may also interfere with the Right to Peaceful Assembly under Article 19(1)(b).
• Crowd-control measures should satisfy the constitutional principles of necessity, reasonableness, and proportionality.

Supreme Court’s Observations

The Court did not impose a blanket ban on pellet guns.

Instead, it observed that:

• Pellet guns may be used only as part of a graded response mechanism in exceptional situations.
• Every use of force must remain subject to constitutional safeguards.
• Allegations of arbitrary or disproportionate use of force can be examined through judicial review on a case-by-case basis.

Why is this PIL Significant?

The case demonstrates how PIL functions as an instrument of constitutional accountability.

It enables the judiciary to:

• Protect Fundamental Rights.
• Review executive decisions.
• Promote police accountability.
• Ensure that restrictions on civil liberties remain proportionate and legally justified.
• Balance public order with democratic freedoms.

Constitutional Significance

The case reinforces that:

• Citizens have the right to peaceful protest.
• The State has a constitutional duty to maintain public order.
• Police powers are not absolute.
• Executive actions remain subject to judicial scrutiny whenever Fundamental Rights are alleged to have been violated.

At a Glance

Prelims Quick Facts

✔ PIL is a judicial innovation and is not expressly mentioned in the Constitution.

✔ Article 32 is known as the Heart and Soul of the Constitution (Dr. B. R. Ambedkar).

✔ Article 226 gives High Courts wider writ jurisdiction than Article 32.

✔ PIL relaxes the traditional rule of locus standi.

✔ Judicial Review is a basic feature of the Constitution.

Mains Value Addition

Possible Question

“Discuss the role of Public Interest Litigation (PIL) in ensuring police accountability while balancing Fundamental Rights and public order.”

Keywords for Answer Writing

• Public Interest Litigation (PIL)
• Judicial Review
• Constitutional Remedies
• Access to Justice
• Rule of Law
• Police Accountability
• Fundamental Rights
• Doctrine of Proportionality
• Reasonable Restrictions
• Constitutional Governance