The Supreme Court on Tuesday dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) that sought directions to “establish certain facts” about Hindutva ideologue Vinayak Damodar Savarkar and to prevent the misuse of his name.
A Bench comprising Chief Justice BR Gavai and Justice Augustine George Masih found no merit in the petition, holding that no fundamental rights of the petitioner were violated, and therefore, the Court could not intervene.
“What is your fundamental right violation in this? We cannot entertain writs like this. The relief sought cannot be granted,” the Court stated while dismissing the plea.
About the Petition
The PIL was filed by Dr. Pankaj Phadnis, who appeared in person. He requested the Court to:
- Direct the Lok Sabha Speaker to include Savarkar’s name under the Schedule of the Emblems and Names (Prevention of Improper Use) Act, 1950, a law that prohibits the improper use of specific names and symbols for commercial or professional gain.
- Prevent misuse of Savarkar’s name in public discourse.
- Uphold his fundamental duties under Article 51A of the Constitution, claiming such misuse hinders the discharge of those duties.
Phadnis emphasized his lifelong research on Savarkar, stating:
“I am 65 years old. I have been researching him for 30 years.”
Court’s Stand
The Court was firm in its refusal to entertain the PIL, asserting that the nature of the relief sought did not warrant judicial intervention.
Related Development
The case comes amid heightened political sensitivity around Savarkar’s legacy. A different Bench of the Supreme Court had recently criticized Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi for calling Savarkar a “collaborator” who received a pension from the British.
That Bench—comprising Justices Dipankar Datta and Manmohan—termed Gandhi’s comments “irresponsible” and warned that the Court may take suo motu action if similar statements were repeated. However, it stayed a Magistrate court’s summons to Gandhi in the related criminal case.
