A Division Bench of Justice Vijay Kumar Shukla and Justice Binod Kumar Dwivedi said the conduct of the petitioner amounted to an abuse of the PIL mechanism. During the hearing, the court sharply questioned the repeated filings, remarking, “Do you consider the court a spectacle, that petitions are being filed repeatedly in the same case?” The judges noted that such misuse of judicial time cannot be permitted.
According to the court, records and social media posts suggested that the petition stemmed from personal vendetta rather than genuine public concern. The Bench cited Supreme Court rulings including Balwant Singh Chaufal, S.P. Guru Raja, Devendra Prakash Mishra and Gurpal Singh to reiterate that PILs must be anchored in substantial public interest, not deployed as instruments for personal gain or settling scores.
Additional Advocate General Anand Soni appeared for the state government and argued that the repeated petitions amounted to harassment and unnecessary litigation.
The court emphasised that PILs are meant to serve as the “voice of the people” and must demonstrate urgency, wide public impact, and bona fide intent. It directed Sisodia to deposit the ₹1 lakh penalty with the High Court Legal Services Authority, Indore, within one month.
The order is expected to act as a deterrent against the growing trend of frivolous PILs, with the Bench underscoring that courts will not entertain petitions that circumvent due process or burden the justice system without legitimate grounds.
