Supreme Court Penalises Advocate ₹7,000 for 'Publicity-Driven' PIL on CJI's Protocol Breach

The Supreme Court has imposed a ₹7,000 fine on an advocate who filed a public interest litigation alleging a breach of protocol during Chief Justice of India Bhushan Ramkrishna Gavai's visit to Maharashtra. The bench, led by CJI Gavai himself, dismissed the plea, labelling it an attempt at "cheap publicity" and a misuse of judicial resources.

The PIL sought an inquiry into the absence of senior state officials—such as the Chief Secretary, Director General of Police, and Mumbai Police Commissioner—during CJI Gavai's arrival in Mumbai on 18 May. This incident had sparked political controversy, with opposition parties criticising the BJP-led Maharashtra government for the perceived lapse in protocol. Revenue Minister Chandrashekhar Bawankule acknowledged the oversight and personally apologised to the CJI, assuring corrective measures.

Despite the CJI's public appeal on 20 May to consider the matter trivial and to move on, the advocate proceeded with the PIL. The court noted that the petitioner ignored the CJI's request to put the issue to rest and instead sought media attention through litigation. The bench refused the advocate's request to withdraw the PIL, emphasising that the judiciary should not be used for personal publicity.

In response to the protocol lapse, the Maharashtra state government issued new guidelines to ensure proper reception of high-ranking dignitaries in the future. The CJI has now been accorded the status of a permanent state guest to prevent similar breaches. Additionally, the Bar Council of Maharashtra & Goa passed a resolution demanding accountability and appropriate action against the officers who failed in their duties, highlighting the importance of maintaining the dignity of judicial institutions.

CJI Gavai, who was sworn in as the 52nd Chief Justice of India on 14 May, is the second Dalit to hold the position. Born in Amravati, Maharashtra, he began his legal career in 1985 and has served as a judge in the Bombay High Court and the Supreme Court. He has been involved in several landmark rulings, including the judgment upholding demonetisation and the verdict declaring the electoral bonds scheme unconstitutional.

Post a Comment

Cookie Consent
We serve cookies on this site to analyze traffic, remember your preferences, and optimize your experience.
Oops!
It seems there is something wrong with your internet connection. Please connect to the internet and start browsing again.
AdBlock Detected!
We have detected that you are using adblocking plugin in your browser.
The revenue we earn by the advertisements is used to manage this website, we request you to whitelist our website in your adblocking plugin.
Site is Blocked
Sorry! This site is not available in your country.
Hyphen Digital Welcome to WhatsApp chat
Howdy! How can we help you today?
Type here...