Bengaluru: The Karnataka High Court has dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking directions to the Union Government to constitute a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) to investigate why no judicial commission was appointed to inquire into the assassination of Mahatma Gandhi until 1965.
A division bench headed by Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru rejected the petition filed by Bengaluru resident KN Manjunath and imposed a cost of Rs 10,000 on the petitioner for what it termed a misuse of judicial time.
During the hearing, the bench observed that a similar plea had been filed earlier and that the petitioner had once again approached the court with substantially the same set of demands.
The court noted that the petition did not disclose any genuine element of public interest and amounted to an unnecessary burden on the judicial system.
The bench directed the petitioner to deposit the penalty amount with the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority within two weeks.
In his petition, Manjunath had sought a direction to the Centre to form a Joint Parliamentary Committee to investigate why a judicial inquiry commission into Gandhi’s assassination was not constituted between 1947 and 1965, nearly 17 years after the assassination. He also requested an inquiry into the circumstances that led to the establishment of a judicial commission in 1965.
The petitioner further urged the court to direct the Union Government to initiate an international-level investigation into an alleged missing letter purportedly written by Mahatma Gandhi to the United Nations on December 30, 1947, concerning the Kashmir issue. According to the plea, the alleged letter was missing and had been replaced by another communication dated January 1, 1948.
However, the High Court found no merit in the contentions raised and held that the petition failed to establish any substantial public interest warranting judicial intervention.
Observing that repeated litigation on the same issue wastes valuable court time, the bench declined to entertain the plea and formally dismissed the petition while imposing costs on the petitioner.
