AP High Court imposes Rs 50,000 fine on petitioner

Nelapadu (Guntur district): The division bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court on Thursday took serious exception to the misuse of public interest litigation which is intended to support the people without voice.

Hearing a public interest litigation filed by former chairman of the Official Language Commission P Vijay Babu, the division bench opined that it is the sheer misuse of the provisions of the public interest litigation.

It may be recalled that Vijay Babu filed the public interest litigation challenging the ‘arbitrary arrests’ of the YSRCP social media activists across the state. He claimed that the social media activists were making voice of people heard and bringing to light the ‘injustices’ in the society. He pointed out in the petition that the government has been arbitrarily and randomly arresting the social media activists and filing criminal cases against them.

It may be noted that the state government is cracking down on YSRCP supporters who indulged organised posting of highly obscene and objectionable content on social media platforms against TDP and Jana Sena leaders as well as their family members, including even children.

However, the division bench recalled that the social media activists have been posting highly objectionable material on the internet. They are insulting the family members of the celebrities and leaders of various political parties. The division bench stated that it was not police who are systematically and mechanically filing criminal cases. In fact, it is the ‘social media activists’ who number over 2,000, who are posting the highly objectionable content on the Internet abusing the family members of various celebrities and the political leaders. The court opined that the police are not committing any mistake by filing criminal cases against such abusers.

The YSRCP social media teams posted derogatory comments even against the High Court judges in the past when they delivered certain rulings. Senior advocate and former advocate general during the YSRCP rule S Sriram argued on behalf of the petitioner.