A Supreme Court judge voiced concerns regarding the abuse of Public Interest Litigation (PIL)

The judge stated that the misuse of PILs has reduced their effectiveness as a tool for social justice.

Regarding the Definition of Public Interest Litigation (PIL): It describes lawsuits brought by a party without "locus standi," or the party who is not harmed, in order to defendthe benefit of the public at large.

Important characteristics:

It goes by other names, like Social Interest Litigation. Additionally, the concept is taken from American legal precedent.

There is no statute or act that defines it. It is the authority that courts grant the people through judicial activism.

Articles 32 and 226 grant the Supreme Court and the High Courts the authority to accept PILs, respectively.

Origin: The Supreme Court initially relaxed the Locus Standi concept in the 1976 decision of Mumbai Kamgar Sabha v. Abdulbhai Faizullabhai.

The first public interest litigation case to be published was Hussainara Khatoon vs. State of Bihar in 1979.Among the earliest justices to entertain PILs were Justices V R Krishna Iyer and P N Bhagwati.

The former is recognized as the originator of public interest litigation in India. The Triple Talaq case, the legalization of consensual gay partnerships, the opening of Haji Ali shrines to women, and other landmark decisions were all the product of public interest litigation (PILs).

Principal Issues with PILs

The use of PILs as publicity interest litigation or private interest litigation is criticized for serving vested interests and oblique motives.

Judicial Overreach: Public interest litigation (PILs) can result in judicial overreach, in which courts meddle in matters of policy that belong to the legislature and executive branch.

The judiciary's burden: The judiciary's time is wasted on pointless petitions.