Read Time: 05 minutes

The Karnataka High Court today imposed Rs 10 lakhs as costs to a petitioner who filed a PIL against his former business associate.

The Court has directed the said amount be deposited with the Karnataka Advocates’ Clerks Association.

“The petition not only deserved to be dismissed by dismissed with exemplary costs. The petitioner is directed to deposit of Rs 10 lakhs with the Karnataka Registered Advocates' Clerks Association as large number of Clerks are affected on account of COVID-19”, said the Court.

Acting Chief Justice Sathish Chandra Sharma and Justice SS Magadum was hearing a plea moved by Prashanth Amin.

The petition claimed that Respondent Number 5, Raj Fish Meal and Oil Company had been disposing fish and other pollutants, directly into the environment, thereby causing environmental pollution.

During the hearing, the counsel appearing for the Respondent Company informed the present petition is not a PIL as the petitioner has vested interest in the same.

In fact, the Petitioner had received Rs 95 crores from the Respondent Company and was his former business associate, the Court was told. Owing to some issues in their partnership, the petitioner terminated the contract with the Respondent Company.

Subsequently, the petitioner filed the instant PIL.

However, these facts were not mentioned by the petitioner is his petition.

The Court did not seem happy with these observations and opined that there was clear suppression of facts by the petitioner.

“In the considered opinion of this Court, in the present case is a personal interest litigation in the form the PIL….there is a clear suppression of facts in the present petition......This Court is of the considered opinion that the present PIL is not at all maintainable. This is a personal interest litigation by a person who is having business interest with Respondent 6. This is a sheer misuse of the process of law.”

The Pollution Control Board had submitted that it had been carrying out periodical inspections and that the present company has been complying with all the statutory requirements pertaining to waste disposal. The Court placed reliance on this aspect as well.

In view of the above, the Court dismissed the petition and directed the petitioner to pay the costs imposed within 30 days.

[Case Name: Prashanth Amin Vs Karnataka State Pollution Control Board]