Delhi High Court Dismisses PIL Seeking Review Of Parliament's Security Framework, Says Matter Is Beyond Writ Jurisdiction

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday dismissed a PIL seeking a direction on the Union Government to review the existing framework governing the safety, security and “uninterrupted constitutional functioning” of the Parliament of India.

A division bench comprising Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia said that the safety and security aspect of the Parliament is to be looked into by the Government of India and no such direction can be passed in exercise of writ jurisdiction.

“We find ourselves at loss of words as to how such direction as sought in the petition can be issued. It is for the Parliament to consider and review the mechanism from time to time,” the Court said.

The Court rejected the PIL filed by one Raj Singh, who claimed himself to be an academic in the area of public policy, constitutional governance and institutional reforms.

Apart from seeking review of the existing framework regarding safety and security of Parliament, Singh also sought reform of the Parliament's administrative, technological and cyber security mechanism.

During the hearing, the CJ orally told Singh's counsel:

“Is the Parliament of this country incapable of taking care of its security? What kind of petition is this? We will now impose costs…Whatever comes to your mind in the process of thinking, you may carry a very good thought, very good suggestion but all that does not become subject matter of a PIL.”

Singh also sought a direction on the Union Government to consider a concept note prepared by him in respect of a proposed legislation on the security, sanctity and protection of the Parliament of India.

On this, the Bench said that it is very difficult for the Court to accept such a prayer.

“The petitioner is seeking a direction from this Court to the respondents to examine a concept note prepared by an individual on a proposed legislation. Such direction cannot be issued by the Court in exercise of writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petition is dismissed,” the Court said.

Title: Raj Singh v. Union of India & Ors