SC refuses to hear PIL; refers it to larger bench

New Delhi, Dec 11 (UNI) Within 24 hours of publication of the Supreme Court judgement, telling the Indian Judiciary not to venture into the domains of Legislature and the Executive, another bench of the apex court refused to hear a PIL seeking reconsideration of the December 6 verdict and referred it to a three-judge bench.

Virtually asking for reconsideration of the judgement dated December 6, which was reported yesterday, a bench comprising Justices S B Sinha and H S Bedi noted, '' In view of yesterday's judgement of this court, the issue, whether this court can entertain and decide such a petition, should be referred to a three-judge bench.'' A PIL filed by Prajwala, an NGO, sought directions from the apex court that girls and women arrested under the Immoral Trafficking Act should be treated as victims and not as accused and the State should make arrangements for their proper rehabilitation.

A bench headed by Justice Sinha directed that the petition be placed before the Chief Justice of India for constituting an appropriate bench for consideration of the issue whether this court has the power to entertain and decide the issues raised in the petition and whether this court is competent to grant the relief sought in the petition.

The bench comprising Justices A K Mathur and Markandey Katju had told the Judiciary, including the Supreme Court and the High Courts, not to overstep their limitations and try to run the government and also telling the judges not to act as emperors. And if the Judiciary continues to encroach into the domain of the other organs of the State, then the politicians may react by curtailing their power.

The hard-hitting judgement, copies of which were made available to the media only yesterday, has gone to the extent of declaring the Delhi High Court directions on the issue of admission of tiny tots in Nursery classes as illegal when the petitions on the same issue are already pending before the other bench of the Supreme Court.

The judgement has plainly told the Judiciary not to make laws and only to implement the laws made by Parliament.

Today's order, virtually seeks the review of the judgement of the bench headed by Justice A K Mathur which was delivered on December 6. Yesterday's judgement has also cautioned the Judiciary for over Judicial Activism so that it may not become judicial adventurism.

UNI