Delhi HC Dismisses Plea by Juhi Chawla, Imposes Costs of 20 Lakh
Justice JR Midha added that the suit filed by Juhi against 5G rollout in India appeared to be a publicity stunt.
The Delhi High Court dismissed the suit filed by actor Juhi Chawla along with Veeresh Malik and Teena Vachani against the implementation of 5G technology in India without proper testing. The Bench led by Justice JR Midha also said that the suit appeared to be a publicity stunt and the Court has imposed a fine of 20 lakh the plaintiffs.
Plaintiffs abused process of law. Costs of Rs 20 lakh is imposed on plaintiffs. It appears suit was for publicity. Juhi Chawla circulated link of the hearing on social media.Justice JR Midha
"It appears suit was for publicity," the Court said, noting that Juhi Chawla had circulated the link of the hearing on social media.
Khosla sought a stay on the order but Justice Midha responded, "Matter is over. You have your legal remedies."
During the hearing that took place on 2 June, Advocate Khosla, representing the plaintiffs, had asked the Court to consider a waiver of Section 80 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC). The section states that no suit shall be instituted against the Government or a public officer until after 2 months of sending them a notice in writing.
Justice Midha now ruled that the plaint was defective and held that, "No case made out for leave to institute suit (under Section 80)..or to sue in representative capacity. Plaint is defective and not maintainable."
On 2 June, people interrupted the proceedings multiple times by singing songs from Chawla's films. Addressing the matter, the Court directed, "Delhi Police shall identify the persons and take action against those who created disruption."
Juhi Chawla recently clarified in a statement that her agenda is not to ban 5G. Instead, she wants the government to certify that 5G technology is safe.
However, we seek from the Government and authorities to certify to us and to the public at large, that 5G technology is safe to humankind, every type of living organism, flora and fauna.Juhi Chawla, in a statement
Chawla and others had argued that the suit was based on the belief that the technology could pose 'imminent danger'.
(With inputs from Bar & Bench)
Subscribe To Our Daily Newsletter And Get News Delivered Straight To Your Inbox.