HC dismisses PIL against Eknath Shinde-led Shiv Sena’s Dussehra rally

By Lokmat English Desk | Published: September 7, 2023 10:23 AM2023-09-07T10:23:09+5:302023-09-07T10:23:33+5:30

The Bombay High Court on Wednesday dismissed a petition filed by a social activist seeking a probe into the ...

HC dismisses PIL against Eknath Shinde-led Shiv Sena’s Dussehra rally | HC dismisses PIL against Eknath Shinde-led Shiv Sena’s Dussehra rally

HC dismisses PIL against Eknath Shinde-led Shiv Sena’s Dussehra rally

The Bombay High Court on Wednesday dismissed a petition filed by a social activist seeking a probe into the funds used by Maharashtra Chief Minister Eknath Shinde for organising a Dussehra rally in Bandra-Kurla Complex (BKC) in October 2022.A division bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Arif Doctor dismissed the plea after noting that the activist's lawyer failed to appear before the court for the third time.

During previous hearings, the court had requested the petitioner Deepak Jagdev, who is also a social activist and lawyer in Mumbai, to provide substantial documents or evidence to support the claims made in the PIL.These claims centered around the massive turnout at Chief Minister Shinde's rally, asserting that it attracted nearly 2 lakh people from across the state. The PIL further alleged that the Maharashtra Road Transport Corporation (MSRTC) deployed as many as 1,700 buses for ferrying attendees to the event, incurring a cost of over Rs 10 crores.The PIL, originally filed in 2022, also took a critical stance on Shinde's government, contending that it remains unrecognised. It sought a thorough investigation by central agencies, including the Enforcement Directorate, Central Bureau of Investigation, or the Economic Offences Wing of Mumbai Police.

In one of the earlier court hearings, the bench had expressed skepticism regarding the PIL's motivations, stating, "This is a politically motivated PIL." Additionally, a prior hearing before another bench raised concerns about the petitioner's lack of proper disclosure, with the bench remarking, "This is yet another petition where the details of the petitioner have not been stated. We could dismiss the petition on this ground alone.

Open in app