PIL Power: How the Public Changed the Law

The scrapping of Section 66A is just another in a long line of PIL’s that have changed the lives of ordinary Indians

The Supreme Court verdict on Tuesday that struck down Sec 66A of the IT Act deeming it unconstitutional is a huge victory for advocates of free speech. But this is not the only case where a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) has changed the law in India.

The Beginning

Justice PN Bhagawati infused new life into the PIL movement. In the case of SP Gupta v. Union of India. Bhagwati realised that the judiciary was serving only the more well-off sections of society. The poor and social organisations in India could not even afford a lawyer.

So how could ordinary people, so removed from the corridors of power, reach the highest court in the land?

Bhagwati introduced the Postcard revolution. People could now send in their petitions on a postcard, and the court would act it. Through this initiative the PIL became a potent weapon for the masses. Any citizen of India or any consumer groups or social action groups could now approach the Supreme Court seeking legal remedy in cases where public interest was at stake.

Here are some PILs that changed the course of life in our country; empowering the common man.

The NOTA Verdict

The judgement that gave voters the right not to choose any political party, was based on a PIL filed by an NGO, People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL). PUCL had asked that voters be given the right to negative voting.

Ban on Sale of Acid

Supreme Court’s move to ban over-the-counter sale of acid at retail outlets was also the result of a PIL. The court ordered state governments to pay a compensation of Rs three lakh each to each acid attack victim. The petition was filed by acid attack victim Laxmi in 2013.

The Jailed Cannot Contest Elections

Supreme Court’s landmark judgement that the incarcerated cannot contest Parliamentary or Assembly elections was the result of a PIL. It was filed by advocate Lily Thomas and was argued by veteran constitutionalist Fali Nariman. A two-member bench of the Supreme Court declared Section 8(4) of the Representation of People Act (RPA) unconstitutional.

The Incomplete but Powerful Impact of Section 377

The 2009 Delhi Court judgement overturning section 377 and decriminalising gay sex was a landmark achievement on a PIL filed by Laxmi Narayan Tripathi alias Laxmi. However, it was undone by the Supreme Court in 2013.

Vishaka Guidelines

In September 1992 Bhawanri Devi, a village level worker with an NGO, was raped for trying to stop a child marriage in Bateri, Rajasthan. The five accused in the case were acquitted by the trial court. Enraged by this Vishaka and other NGOs moved to Supreme Court against the State of Rajasthan and Union of India seeking measures to stop sexual harassment of women at a workplace. In September 1997, the Supreme Court in a landmark judgment known as Vishakha Verdict laid down the definition of sexual harassment and the measures to protect women in the workplace.