Government wants to abolish Public Interest Litigation (PIL) system?
The Indian government has urged the Supreme Court to end the Public Interest Litigation (PIL) system but has not formally proposed legislation to abolish it. This demand arose during a hearing on the Sabarimala temple case review before a nine-judge Constitution Bench.
Government Position
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta argued that PILs, introduced for access to justice amid poverty and illiteracy, are now outdated due to legal aid bodies like the National Legal Services Authority, e-filing, and direct court access. The Centre claims PILs foster “agenda-driven litigation,” surrogate suits, and docket overload—from 25,000 cases yearly in 1985 to over 70,000 by 2019—with most being frivolous.
Court Response
Chief Justice Surya Kant stated courts are already “very cautious” in entertaining PILs, applying strict parameters to check motives and substance before issuing notices. The bench declined to fully engage, noting evolved judicial scrutiny since 2006, and focused on Sabarimala-specific issues like non-devotees challenging religious practices.
Key Arguments
-
Pro-Abolition: Restore locus standi; use targeted legal aid for genuine cases unable to approach courts.
-
Context: Raised amid questions on PIL maintainability in Sabarimala, where non-devotees filed original petitions.
This remains a judicial debate, with no abolition enacted as of April 2026.
