9. Suo Moto Cognisance/Actions taken by the Supreme Court and

NATIONAL JUDICIAL ACADEMY

RESEARCH REPORT ON:

SUO MOTO COGNIZANCE/ACTION BY THE SUPREME

COURT AND HIGH COURTS IN INDIA AFTER 2000

SUBMITTED BY:

ASTITVA PRATAP SINGH (INTERN 11/05/2015-

04/05/2015)

NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY ODISHA, CUTTACK

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LEVEL I ANALYSIS: ........................................................................................................ 4

Supreme Court .................................................................................................................. 4

Allahabad High Court ....................................................................................................... 6

Andhra Pradesh High Court .............................................................................................. 9

Bombay High Court ........................................................................................................ 11

Calcutta High Court ........................................................................................................ 13

Chhattisgarh High Court ................................................................................................. 14

Delhi High Court ............................................................................................................ 14

Guwahati High Court ...................................................................................................... 17

Gujarat High Court ......................................................................................................... 18

Himachal Pradesh High Court ........................................................................................ 19

Jammu and Kashmir High Court ..................................................................................... 21

Jharkhand High Court ..................................................................................................... 21

Karnataka High Court..................................................................................................... 24

Kerala High Court .......................................................................................................... 26

Madhya Pradesh High Court ........................................................................................... 26

Tamil Nadu (Madras) High Court ................................................................................... 26

Manipur, Meghalaya High Court .................................................................................... 31

Tripura High Court ......................................................................................................... 31

Orissa High Court ........................................................................................................... 31

Patna High Court ............................................................................................................ 32

Punjab and Haryana High Court..................................................................................... 34

Rajasthan high court ....................................................................................................... 39

Sikkim High Court ........................................................................................................... 42

Uttarakhand High Court ................................................................................................. 43

LEVEL II ANALYSIS: ..................................................................................................... 44

LEVEL III ANALYSIS..................................................................................................... 46

LEVEL I ANALYSIS:

SUPREME COURT

S. No. Case Subject Matter

1. Bank of India Vs. Vijay Transport & Ors.,

MANU/SC/0636/2000

Suo Moto contempt proceedings

initiated for disobeying the orders

given by the court.

2. In Re: Arundhati Roy,

MANU/SC/0160/2002


were initiated against Arundhati Roy

as she published an article entitled

"The Greater Common Good" in

Outlook Magazine and the comments

made by her were, prima facie, a

misrepresentation of the proceedings

of the court.

3. In Re: Bineet Kumar Singh,

MANU/SC/0333/2001


initiated for interference with the

administration of justice.

4. In Re: Death of 25 Chained Inmates in Asylum

Fire in Tamil Nadu Vs. Union of India and Ors.,

MANU/SC/0081/2002

The court took Suo Moto action

based on a news item published in all

the daily newspapers regarding more

than 25 mentally challenged patients

who were housed in a mental asylum

were charred to death at Ervadi in

Ramanathapuram district, Tamil

Nadu.

5. In Re: Destruction of Public and Private

PropertiesVs. State of A.P. and Ors.,

MANU/SC/0575/2009

Suo moto proceedings were initiated

by the Supreme Court taking a note

of various instances of large scale

destruction of public and private

properties in the name of agitations,

bandhs and hartals.

6. Leila David Vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors.,

MANU/SC/0488/2009


were initiated for misconduct and

indiscipline inside the court.

7. Re: Suo Moto Proceedings against Mr. R.

Karuppan, Advocate,

MANU/SC/0338/2001

Suo moto contempt proceedings

initiated against the advocate for

filing writ petition with false

affidavit.

8. Court on Its Own Motion Vs. Union of India

(UOI) and Ors.,

MANU/SC/0628/2012,

Certain newspapers reported 67

deaths of Pilgrims during Amarnath

yatra mostly because of cardiac

arrests as well as for other reasons,

the court took Suo moto notice of

concerned Articles to appropriately

deal with this serious subject of lack

of medical and other facilities in

public interest.

9. In Re: Indian Woman says gang-raped on orders

of Village Court published in Business and

Financial News,

MANU/SC/0242/2014

Court initiatedSuo moto proceedings

on learning about the gang rape of a

20 year old woman pursuant to

direction of Village panchayat, as

punishment for having relationship

with a man from a different

community in Subalpur Village, P.S.

Labpur, District Birbhum, State of

West Bengal.

10. In Re: Harassment and Physical Abuse of 'M',

MANU/SC/0932/2014

MANU/SC/0937/2014

The court registered Suo moto writ

petition in this matter on the basis of

a bunch of papers handled by the

complainant in relation to gang rape

and aggrieved by inaction of the

police in the same.

11. In Re: Ink Throwing Incident,

MANU/SC/0407/2014

Contempt of Court, Suo Moto

contempt proceedings initiated

against an advocate for the act of

throwing ink on someone in the

premises of the court.

12. In Re: News Item Published in Hindustan Times

Titles 'And Quiet Flows The Maily Yamuna',

Suo moto proceedings initiated by

the apex court based on a new item

MANU/SC/0153/2012 published in Hindustan Times titled

'A Quite Flows Maili Yamuna' in

relation to the pollution of the river

Yamuna.

13. In Re: Rameshwar Prasad Goyal, Advocate,

MANU/SC/0848/2013


initiated against the Advocate on

Record as he filed an extremely large

number of cases in the Supreme

Court but never appeared for the

same.

14. In Re: Recent Firing Incident, Widely Reported

in The Press, Resulting in the Death of Two

Persons, Allegedly on Account of Use of 25

Firearms by Some Private Security Personnel,

MANU/SC/1117/2012

Cognizance of a firing incident by

private security personnel which

resulted in death of two was taken

based on the news items published in

this regard.

15. Rajeshwar Singh Vs. Subrata Roy Sahara and

Ors.,

MANU/SC/1321/2011


contempt proceedings initiated.

16. Amicus Curiae Vs. Prashant Bhushan and Anr.,

MANU/SC/0490/2010



ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT


1. Association of Dead People, Azamgarh and

another Vs. State of U.P. and others,

MANU/UP/0131/2000

The High Court took Suo moto

cognizance of a media report

highlighted in the TIMEmagazine,

Asia Edition which published an

Article entitled "Plight of the Living

Dead : Indian Farmers declared

deceased by unscrupulous relatives

must prove they're alive to regain

their land."

2. District Co-operative Bank Ltd. Vs. Badri Ram and

Ors.,

The court Suo moto initiated review

proceedings in this case, the case was

MANU/UP/0713/2002 earlier decided but certain provisions

were not brought to the notice of the

judge hence this review was initiated.

3. Suomoto action taken by the Court Vs.ICICI Bank

Ltd. through its Chairman and Ors.,

MANU/UP/1273/2005

The court took Suo moto cognizance

of some questions of larger public

importance which arose from the

facts brought on record in the case

Rakesh Mehta and Ors. v.State of

U.P. and Ors., Petition No. 58318 of

2005.

4. Manoj Kumar Kesharwani Vs. Sanjai Kumar

Kesharwani and Ors.,

MANU/UP/2484/2006

The court initiated Suo moto

contempt proceedings on the grounds

of violation of interim injunction

granted by the lower court on the

basis of a complaint received by the

court.

5. In Re: PadamKirti,

MANU/UP/0912/2006


in this case in the basis of a news

report published in Hindustan Times

titled “Bar squabble: Judges cry off

dinner” and initiated contempt

proceedings.

6. Suo motu action taken by the Court Vs.

SadhnaUpadhyaya Advocate,

MANU/UP/1738/2009


initiated by the court against the

advocate for alleging the Judge with

the charge of lack of integrity,

disrupted the proceedings of the court

and also damaged the property of the

court.

7. In Re : Govt. Children's Home at Shivkuti

Allahabad,

MANU/UP/0861/2012

Court took Suo moto cognizance of

the matter after a news report in the

"Hindustan" daily of crimes of sexual

abuse of minor orphan girls in the

Shivkuti, Allahabad

RajkiyaShishuGrih (Government

Home for infants) by a contract

chowkidar.

8. In Re: ZilaAdhivakta Sangh Allahabad,

MANU/UP/0281/2015

Suo motu jurisdiction of Court

invoked in the public interest to

decide matter of strike by the

advocates which disrupted the

function of Court.

9. Inaction of Police in Lodging FIR's in Offences

Against Women Vs. State of U.P.,

MANU/UP/2258/2013


of matter related to Delay in lodging

F.I.R. in serious cases of Offences

against women.

10. Ram Swaroop Vs. State of U.P. and Ors.,

MANU/UP/2407/2013

The court initiated Suo Moto

contempt proceedings against the

contemnor who did not comply with

the directions given by the high

court.

11. Re: In the Matter of Contempt by the Weekly

Magazine Outlook Vs. Vinod Mehta, Editor in Chief

Outlook and Ors.,

MANU/UP/0531/2011


contempt proceedings on the basis of

a story published in a news magazine

“Outlook” for making the

contemptuous statement outlined in

the story which denigrate the Chief

Justice and the judiciary generally

and tend to scandalize and lower the

authority of the Court and to

prejudice the due course of judicial

proceedings.

12. State of U.P. Vs. Rajesh Tiwari,

MANU/UP/0476/2010



contemnor for attempting to lower

the dignity of Court.

13. State of U.P. Vs. Resident Editor, Times of India 16,

MANU/UP/0187/2011

The proceedings for contempt of

Court initiated by the

Court Suo motu on the basis of the

news item, published in the Times of

India with the caption "AYODHYA,

MEMORIES OF A DISPUTED

LIFETIME". The court considered

the said item to be provocative,

calculated to embitter relations

between two communities and

message to Court that if pending

matter was not decided in particular

way serious unruly consequences

would occur.

ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT


1. Advocate General Vs. State of A.P. and Ors.,

MANU/AP/0006/2004

The court Suo motu took the writ

petition for consideration in

connection with the collapse of the

multi-storeyed

residential/commercial complexes in

the cities of Hyderabad,

Visakhapatnam and other Municipal

Corporations in the State of A.P. on

the basis of a news item under the

heading 'Building crash raises

disturbing questions' reported by

‘The Hindu’.

2. DokalaPaparao Vs. DokalaButchi Raju and Anr.,

MANU/AP/1547/2002



3. In Re: Official Liquidator, High Court of Andhra

Pradesh; In Re: Southern Udhyans Ltd. (in

Liquidation); In Re: Southern Wonder World

Resorts Ltd. (in Liquidation); In Re: Southern

Continental Contractors Ltd. (Suo Motu Ordered

for Provisional Liquidation),

MANU/AP/0172/2008



4. In Re: Sri SitaramChaprala, Advocate, High Court

of A.P.,

MANU/AP/0556/2009



5. In re: Sri V. Satyanarayana Rao S/o. Sri V.C. Rao,

MANU/AP/0579/2007



6. Mystery Gas Spreads Panic Vs. The Director, A.P.

Pollution Control Board, The Inspector of

Factories, The Secretary to Govt., Industries

Department, The Secretary to Govt., Forest, Energy,

Environment Science & Technology Dept and The

Chief Secretary to Govt., Govt of A.P. and 13 Ors.,

MANU/AP/1129/2001

Court took the matter Suo moto on

the basis of newspaper reports

regarding spreading of panic owing

to a mischievous gas with foul smell

resulting in breathing problem.

7. News Item (Paper Clipping, The New Indian

Express dated 27-10-2005 at page No. 5)Vs.

Principal, Bapatla Engineering College,

MANU/AP/0859/2005

The court Suo moto took up writ

petition based on an article published

in a newspaper under the caption

"Ragging drives student to suicide"

which reveals that a first year student

of an Engineering College,

committed suicide by consuming

pesticide at his residence.

8. State of A.P. rep. by the Advocate General, High

Court of A.P. Vs. S. Tulasidas, Advocate, S. Sharat

Kumar, Legal Correspondent of Andhra Jyothi and

S. Pradeep Kumar, Legal Correspondent of

Vaartha,

MANU/AP/1524/2002



9. State of A.P. Vs. O.P. Jalan and another,

MANU/AP/0563/2000



10. In Re: BandaruMadhava Naidu,

MANU/AP/0183/2015



BOMBAY HIGH COURT


1. Court on its own motion Vs. State of Maharashtra

and Ors.,

MANU/MH/1489/2008

The Court took Suo moto cognizance

of news items of dangerous and

dilapidated structures in the Nagpur

City which were not, or could not be

demolished.

2. Gopal L. Raheja and Anr. Vs. Vijay B. Raheja and

Ors.,

MANU/MH/0782/2006



3. High Court of Judicature of Bombay Vs. Ms.

Manisha Koirala and Anr.,

MANU/MH/1793/2002



4. High Court on its own motion Vs. Shri

GopinathMundhe and Ors.,

MANU/MH/0724/2006



5. In Re: Mr. B. S. Brar, Director General of Police,

State of Goa, Panaji, Goa; Mr. Manish

SadanandKarapurkar Editor, The Times of India

and Goa Edition, Vivenda de Hassan, D.B.

Bandodkar Marg, Miramar, Panaji, Goa

AND

In Re: Mr. Bosco George, Superintendent of Police

(North) Panaji, Goa; Mr. AshwinTombat Editor, O

Heraldo, St. Tome Road, Panaji, Goa,

MANU/MH/1712/2008



6. Suo Motu Writ Petition on the reports published in

various Marathi Newspapers about the untimely

death of many children due to malnutrition within

two months Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Ors.,

MANU/MH/0625/2006

Suo moto writ petition taken up by

the court based on the news report of

the Marathi newspaper with regard to

the death of children due to

malnourishment within tribal as well

as non-tribal areas.

7. The Court on its Own Motion Vs. Sou.

JayashreeKhadilkar

Pandey, NilkanthYeshwantKhadilkar and The State



of Maharashtra,

MANU/MH/0474/2003

8. The Managing Director, (Goa Constructions

Housing and Finance Corporation Limited), State of

Goa through its Chief Secretary and Mr. Siddharth

Kuncalienkar, Shantaban Co-operative Hsg. Society

Vs. State of Goa through Chief Secretary, Health

Minister, Finance Minister (Secretariat) and

Director, Directorate of Health Services,

MANU/MH/0014/2009

Court took cognizance of public

advertisement released by

Government officials of public sector

undertaking wishing happy birthday

and wedding anniversary to the

Chairman.

9. The Registrar, High Court of Judicature at Bombay,

Bench at Aurangabad Vs. The State of Maharashtra

and Bhagwan S/o PralhadFulsunder,

MANU/MH/0902/2007



10. Article in Mumbai Mirror Vs. The Secretary,

Department of Women and Child Development,

Govt. of Maharashtra and Ors.,

MANU/MH/1258/2010


of the matter based on the article

Mumbai Mirror stating that, five

mentally challenged children lodged

at a Children's Home has died of

malnutrition and disease. One child is

alleged to have been raped. Another

is missing.

11. Court on its Own Motion Vs. The Nagpur Municipal

Corporation, through Commissioner and Ors.,

MANU/MH/1708/2010


and initiated this public interest

litigation based on the news item

published in local daily "Navbharat"

exposing pathetic road conditions,

rampant encroachment on footpaths

and chaotic conditions due to traffic

congestion, water logging at various

places in rainy season for want of

proper drainage, unauthorized hotels

and shop owners throwing garbage

and dirty water on road, coupled with

unauthorized taxis and two wheelers

parking on footpaths in surroundings

of Nagpur Railway Station

12. High Court on its own Motion Vs.

DnyandevTulshiramJadhav and State of

Maharashtra,

MANU/MH/0371/2011



13. High Court on its own Motion Vs. Mr. N.B.

Deshmukh,

MANU/MH/1689/2010



14. High Court on its own motion Vs. Shri Dattatray

Narayan Samant and Shri C.S. Joshi, Advocate,

MANU/MH/0691/2011



15. High Court on its own motion Vs. Pradeep

PandurangSuryawanshi, Police Inspector,

MANU/MH/0093/2011



16. In Re: The state of Goa through its Chief Secretary,

Secretariat, Porvorim, Goa, Secretary, P.W.D.,

Government of Goa, Secretariat, Porvorim, Goa,

State Pollution Control Board, at Patto, Panaji,

Goa and The Central Pollution Control Board, New

Delhi,

MANU/MH/2165/2010


of the matter and registered a writ

petition on the basis of an editorial

captioned "Rain and Dry Taps",

published in "The Navhind Times".

17. Pilerne Citizens Forum, a Society registered under

the provisions of the Societies Registration Act,

represented herein by its Secretary Shri

SuvarnesinghRane Vs. The State of Goa through its

Chief Secretary and Ors.,

MANU/MH/0888/2010


of the matter based on the basis of a

newspaper report was published in

daily 'Herald'. The newspaper report

was regarding the alleged illegal sale

of the land held by Communidade of

Pilerne to builders after entering into

compromise with builders.

CALCUTTA HIGH COURT


1. The Court on its own Motion Vs. Sri Biman Bose Contempt of Court, Suo Moto

and 2 Ors.,

MANU/WB/0114/2010


2. In Re: The Court on its Own Motion,

MANU/WB/0067/2007

Court initiated Suo moto contempt

proceedings.

3. In Re: Director General of Police and Ors.,

MANU/WB/0023/2007


proceedings.

4. State of West Bengal & Ors.Vs.Pradip Kumar Das

&Ors.,

MANU/WB/1397/2010


proceedings.

CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT

No Cases of Suo Moto cognizance after 2000

DELHI HIGH COURT


1. Court on its Own Motion Vs. Lok Nath Grover and

Anr.,

MANU/DE/4202/2009


proceedings.

2. Court on Its Own Motion Vs. State and Ors.,

MANU/DE/2104/2008

Suo moto cognizance was take up by

the court upon the newspaper reports

which spoke of the terror let loose on

the roads of Delhi by Blue Line buses

in the wake of repeated accidents.

3. Court on its Own Motion Vs. State,

MANU/DE/8932/2007

The court Suo moto took up the issue

related to a sting operation by news

channel showing a teacher involved

in organized prostitution racket as a

result of which the teacher was

attacked and later suspended.

Subsequent investigation revealed

that whole sting operation was stage

managed to frame the teacher.

4. Court on its motion Vs. Union of India (UOI) and

Ors.,

MANU/DE/7415/2007

Court on its motion took into account

the numerous fatal accidents caused

by DTC, blue line and other vehicles

in the Delhi roads due to violation of

rules.

5. Court on its own Motion Vs. Ajay Yadav,

MANU/DE/2850/2009


proceedings.

6. Court on its own Motion Vs. All India Institute of

Medical Sciences,

MANU/DE/0908/2002


in relation to the strike by the

residents doctors association of All

India Institute of Medical Sciences

(AIIMS).

7. Court on its own Motion Vs. Central Bureau of

Investigation,

MANU/DE/0026/2004


based on news item in a national

daily "Statesman" which spoke about

prima facie illegality related to an

order published against which the

court summoned the record, noticed

the CBI and stayed its operation.

8. Court on its own Motion Vs. GulshanBajwa,

MANU/DE/9044/2006


proceedings.

9. Court on its own Motion Vs. State,

MANU/DE/1233/2001


of this case dealing with a petition

under Article 226 of the Constitution

of India, for non-releasing of the

beggars due to their failure to furnish

bail bonds. The same was taken up

by the court on the basis of a news

item which appeared in 'Pioneer'

under the heading "Puja lands man in

beggar's hope".

10. Court on its own motion Vs. Central Vigilance

Commission,

MANU/DE/7645/2007

The court too Suo moto cognizance

in the present case upon a news item

wherein it was alleged that various

application were pending for grant of

sanction for prosecuting the public

servants.

11. Court on its own motion Vs. Mr. GulshanBajwa,

MANU/DE/9519/2006


proceedings.

12. Court on its own motion Vs. State and Ors.,

MANU/DE/0978/2008


registered the petition to issue notices

in respect of a telecast 'Ghoos Mahal

&Tihar Saga' shown by the channel

'AajTak'. The said feature disclosed

and revealed acts of prison officials

showing and giving undue favour to

prisoners in breach of the Rules

under the Jail Manual.

13. Courts On Its Own Motion Vs. In The Matter of

Statement made by Shri Raman Duggal, Adv.,

MANU/DE/0046/2001

The court took up Suo moto

contempt proceedings based on a

news item appearing in the Hindustan

Timeswhich led to issuance of

anotice to the Commissioner,

Municipal Corporation of Delhi.

14. Sh. H. SyamaSundara Rao Vs. Union of India (UOI)

and Ors.,

MANU/DE/9650/2006


proceedings.

15. Court its Own Motion Vs. Union of India (UOI),

MANU/DE/0046/2011


of the matter based on a newspaper

report published in the 'Hindustan

Times' that a destitute woman

breathed her last on a busy street

after giving birth to a baby girl.

16. Court on Its Motion Vs. Directorate of Education

GNCT of Delhi,

MANU/DE/1940/2011

Public interest litigation was

initiated Suo motu by the court on the

basis of a letter about a girl getting

hit by a stone on the eye in a

government school and due to delay

in treatment caused by the school

authorities lost her partial vision.

17. Court on Its Own Motion Vs. Union of India & Ors.,

MANU/DE/0410/2014


of the issue of the recent incidents of

intolerance to movement of people

within the country.

18. Court on its Own Motion Vs. Union of India (UOI)

and Ors.,

MANU/DE/0042/2011

This Public Interest Litigation

was Suo motu initiated by the Court

on the basis of a report published in

'Hindustan Times' captioned "Man

dies as 3 hospitals refuse him

treatment".

19. Court on its Own Motion Vs. Union of India (UOI)

through Secretary, Ministry of Agriculture,

MANU/DE/1362/2011

The court Suo moto initiated this

public interest writ petition on the

basis of the report in the Sunday

Times of India, New Delhi, wherein

it has been mentioned "Indian

veggies, fruits remain highly toxic".

20. Court on its Own Motion Vs. Union of India and

Ors.,

MANU/DE/1489/2015

The court took Suo motu cognizance

of the incident reported in the news

media of a Traffic Policeman, in

retaliation, hurling a brick at a

woman.

21. Court on its Own Motion Vs. Zenith Mining Pvt.

Ltd. &Anr.,

MANU/DE/2952/2013


proceedings.

GUWAHATI HIGH COURT


1. Director, N.E.R.I.S.T. Vs. D. Roy Choudhury,

MANU/GH/0386/2007


proceedings.

2. Krishna Kanta Borah Vs. State of Assam and Ors.,

MANU/GH/0656/2008


proceedings.

3. In Re: State of Assam and Ors.,

MANU/GH/0492/2014


public interest litigation on the basis

of a news report of 'The Sentinel'

regarding encroachment in and

around the birth place of a colossal

figure in the history of Assam.

GUJARAT HIGH COURT


1. Suo Motu Vs. Ahmedabad Municipal Corpn. and 46

Ors.,

MANU/GJ/8067/2006

The court took Suo moto

cognizance to gear up the

administration to take prompt action

in the direction of improving the

sanitary condition of the city of

Ahmedabad.

2. Suo Motu Vs. Mr. S.B. Vakil, Advocate, High Court

of Gujarat and Ors.,

MANU/GJ/8672/2006


proceedings.

3. Suo Motu Vs. State of Gujarat,

MANU/GJ/0313/2005

The court initiated Suo motu action

to see that vehicular traffic is

regulated properly so as to see that

accidents are averted and citizens do

not lose their lives due to accidents.

4. Suo Motu Vs. Nandlal Thakkar, Advocate,

MANU/GJ/0005/2012


proceedings.

5. Suo Motu Vs. State of Gujarat and Ors.,

MANU/GJ/0302/2013

The court Suo moto initiated

thisPublic Interest Litigation on the

basis of a news item published in The

Times of India (Ahmedabad Edition)

captioned "Thrown out by violent

husband? - Wait For Three Months

To File A Domestic Violence

Complaint! and "Class no bar for

Woman Battering", sub-captioned

Protection Officers are exploited

too."

6. Suo Motu Vs. Yogesh J. Bhatt,

MANU/GJ/0788/2014


proceedings.

HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT


1. Court On Its Own Motion Vs. State of H.P. and

Ors.,

MANU/HP/0211/2001


of the matter on the basis of a news-

item which appeared in the

"Hindustan Times" (daily) under the

title "Deaf prisoner denied means to

defend himself" to find out ill-

treatment of deaf prisoner.

2. Court on its Own Motion Vs. State of H.P.,

MANU/HP/0176/2012


of this matter on the basis of a news

item registered which appeared in

Hindustan Times, in which it was

mentioned that power transmission

lines were being laid on left bank of

Sutlej which would endanger area in

question and lead to cutting of more

than 15000 trees.

3. Court on its own motion Vs. Chairman, Baba Balak

Nath Temple Trust Deothsidh District Hamirpur,

H.P.,

MANU/HP/1697/2012

This writ petition was registered Suo

motoon the basis of a letter bringing

in the notice of the Court that an

amount of 1,00,000/-has been spent

from a Trust Fund for an

advertisement in the souvenir

published by the Himachal Tourism.

4. Court on its Own Motion Vs. Union of India,

MANU/HP/0152/2015


of the news item, which appeared in

the daily edition of The Indian

Express under caption "Army

barriers restrict movement in Nahan

villages, locals irked".

5. Court on its Own Motion Vs. State of H.P. and Anr.,

MANU/HP/2884/2010


in this Petition on a news item that

appeared in 'Dainik Jagran' pertaining

to the untouchability.

6. Court on its own motion Vs. State of H.P. and Anr.,

MANU/HP/2960/2010

The court instituted this writ petition

by taking Suo moto cognizance in

view of a news item that appeared in

"Punjab Kesari" regarding the alleged

sad state of affairs in the matter of

functioning of some aided

educational institutions.

7. Court on its own motion Vs. State of HP and Ors.,

MANU/HP/0015/2010

The court Suo moto registered this

writ petition on the basis of a

newspaper item that appeared in the

Tribune which stated that the mother

of a martyr has been waiting for

pension for very long.

8. Court on its own motion Vs. State of Himachal

Pradesh,

MANU/HP/0346/2014


in this matter on the news item,

which was published in the

newspaper "Amar Ujala" wherein it

was reported that 24 students of an

Institute washed away in the Beas

river after the LarjiHydel Power

Project Authorities discharged the

water into the river allegedly without

taking all steps required under law.

9. Court on its own motion Vs. State of Himachal

Pradesh and Ors.,

MANU/HP/2841/2010

The Court has taken Suo motu

cognizance to check and arrest the

menace of stray dogs within the

territorial jurisdiction of Municipal

Corporation, Shimla

10. Court on its own motion Vs. The H.P. State

Cooperative Bank Ltd.,

MANU/HP/0977/2014

The current public interest litigation

was drawn Suo moto by the court

upon treating the recommendation of

the Finance/Purchase committed,

formed to investigate the issue where

Bank Authorities were making tax

deductions on interest accrued on

term deposits, as Public Interest

Litigation.

11. Court on its own motion Vs. The Principal Secretary

(I&PH) to the Govt. of H.P. and Ors.,

MANU/HP/0175/2012

The current case was taken up Suo

moto by the court on the information

brought to the notice of the Chief

Justice that the sewerage treatment

plant at MohallaDoli in District

Hamirpur is situated close to the

natural water supply.

JAMMU AND KASHMIR HIGH COURT

No Cases of Suo Moto cognizance after 2000

JHARKHAND HIGH COURT


1. Court on Its Own Motion Vs. GabrialKujur,

MANU/JH/0852/2006


proceedings.

2. Court on its own motion Vs. State of Jharkhand,

MANU/JH/1031/2006

The court in this case Suo moto

initiated Criminal writ proceedings

on the basis of a newspaper report

containing information about ACJM

recalling the warrant of arrest issued

against the accused.

3. Court on its own motion Vs. The State of Jharkhand

and Ors.,

MANU/JH/0062/2007

The court took up the case Suo moto

on the basis of a letter received by the

father of the deceased aggrieved by

the conduct of the local police and

the improper investigation of the

death of the son.

4. Dhananjay Kumar Vs. State of Jharkhand and Ors.,

MANU/JH/0966/2006


proceedings.

5. Jharkhand High Court (own motion) Vs. Babban

Ram,


proceedings.

MANU/JH/0407/2005

6. Court on its Own Motion Vs. State of Jharkhand,

MANU/JH/1914/2013

The court took up the case Suo moto

upon the safety measures and other

related issues when a tragic accident

happened wherein, an overcrowded

boat capsized in Ranchi Lake.

7. Court On Its Own Motion Vs. State of Jharkhand

and Ors.,

MANU/JH/1039/2011

High Court Suo moto registered large

number of public interest litigations

and ordered that large number of

encroachments on the public sector

units be removed from entire State of

Jharkhand.

8. Court on its Own Motion Vs. The Principal

Secretary,

MANU/JH/1112/2014

The court Suo moto took cognizance

based on the news published in the

various newspapers relating to fasting

of the prisoners regarding premature

release of the life convicts, who have

spent more than 14 years in prison.

9. Court on its Own Motion Vs. The State of

Jharkhand,

MANU/JH/0735/2014


of the matter based on the report in

the daily newspaper "The Telegraph"

about the appalling condition of the

toilets in the State-run-schools.

10. Court on its Own MotionVs.The State of Jharkhand,

MANU/JH/1057/2014


in respect of the alleged trafficking of

a girl in this case.

11. Court on its Own MotionVs.Union of India,

MANU/JH/1349/2014


of the report published in 'The

Hindustan Times' regarding the

devastating effect of Radiation

emanating from the mining of

Uranium on environment and

population in village Jadugora,

district-East Singhbhum in the State

of Jharkhand.

12. Court on its Own MotionVs.Union of India and The court took Suo moto cognizance

Ors.,

MANU/JH/1864/2014

and registered a Public Interest

Litigation based on the news item

published in Hindustan Times

(English Edition) regarding alarming

increase in pre-natal sex

determination amongst the pregnant

women in Jharkhand.

13. Court on its Own motionVs.The State of Jharkhand,

MANU/JH/1485/2014


of the news item reported in the

newspaper, 'Times of India' relating

to low rate of registration of births at

58% in the State of Jharkhand

compared to National Level of 82%

and initiated this as Public Interest

Litigation.

14. Court on its own MotionVs.State of Jharkhand and

Ors.,

MANU/JH/0766/2010


case as Public Interest Litigation

taking notice of the newspaper

publication wherein it was reported

that in the midday meal, a lizard was

found cooked and because of that, the

mid-day meal eaten by the infant

children, forty-eight have become

seriously ill and the condition of the

infant children were found in a

precarious condition.

15. Court on its own motionVs.State of Jharkhand and

Ors.,

MANU/JH/0119/2011

The took up this matter Suo moto

based on the newspaper report of

'Dainik Bhaskar' stating that there are

number of buildings in the city,

which have not submitted

Completion Certificate to the local

authorities and consequently no

occupancy certificates have been

issued by the local authorities.

16. Court on its own motionVs.The State of Jharkhand, The court took up this matter Suo

MANU/JH/0908/2014 moto based on the new item

published by the daily Newspaper

"the Pioneer" (English Edition), it

transpires that a major portion of

Jubilee Lake has dense growth of

aquatic plants algae causing

imminent threat to human life and

life of fishes.

17. Court on its own motion Vs. Union of India and

others,

MANU/JH/1025/2012


on the basis of the news report

published by the Hindustan Times,

Times of India (English Edition),

Dainik Bhaskar, (Hindi Edition)

which transpired that Doctors of

various Government Hospitals,

Dispensaries remained off their

duties on the call of the Indian

Medical Association due to which

several deaths were reported for want

of proper treatment,lots of patient

remained in constant unbearable pain

due to illness, injuries, and a number

of surgeries/operations were

postponed and were not performed

because Doctors were on strike.

KARNATAKA HIGH COURT


1. Suo Motu Vs. The Chief Secretary Government of

Karnataka and The Chairman, Empowered

Committee Bangalore-Mysore Infrastructure

Corridor Project and Ors.,

MANU/KA/0057/2009

The court in this matter took Suo

moto cognizance based on a letter

addressed to the court along with the

book by name of "Bangalore-Mysore

Infrastructure Corridor Project - a

Case Study in Fraud and Collusion to

defeat the ends of justice and defraud

courts" referring to Lok Ayukta for

investigation.

2. Suo Motu Vs. The State of Karnataka represented by

the Chief Secretary and Ors.,

MANU/KA/0275/2009

The High Court in this case Suo moto

initiated Public interest litigation

based on press report as to

mysterious death of elephants in

Mysore forest area.

3. High Court of Karnataka, Bangalore Vs. N.V.

Rinivasa,

MANU/KA/2249/2011


proceedings.

4. High Court of Karnataka, Represented by the

Registrar General Vs. Mr. Patrick Lawrence,

Proprietor, M/s. Lion Holding's,

MANU/KA/2254/2013


proceedings.

5. Suo Motu Vs. Government of Karnataka,

MANU/KA/2397/2014


in the current matter regarding the

unfettered felling of trees brought to

the notice of the Court by a letter

expressing concern over the

unregulated felling of trees in the

garb of development and road

widening in the City of Bangalore.

6. Suo Motu Vs. The State of Karnataka Rep. by The

Chief Secretary and Ors.,

MANU/KA/2097/2013

The court Suo moto initiated the

present petition on directions of

Chief Justice pertaining to death of

four elephants in Mysore Forest Area

reported in daily newspaper.

7. The High Court of Karnataka rep. by its Registrar

General Vs. G. Ramesh S/o late C. Ganesh

Secretary of the Petitioner Institution and Smt.

Pushpalatha W/o. Sri Satyanarayana K.L.,

MANU/KA/0913/2011


proceedings.

KERALA HIGH COURT


1. In Re: M.S. Ravi and Ors.,

MANU/KE/1298/2009');


proceedings.

2. Suo MotuVs.Sri M.S. Ravi, The Partner, Sri K.S.

Mani, Editor-in-Chief, Sri Deepu Ravi, Managing

Editor and Sri M.S. Madhusoosanan,

MANU/KE/0022/2009


proceedings.

3. In Re: M.V. Jayarajan,

MANU/KE/2293/2011


proceedings.

4. Suo Motu Proceedings Vs. State of Kerala,

MANU/KE/0626/2014

The court took up this writ petition

Suo moto on the basis of a joint

petition received from students of the

Government Tribal School with

regard to the lack of proper

classrooms.

MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT


1. Encroachment over Tomb of Mohammad Ghaus Vs.

The State of M.P. and Ors.,

MANU/MP/0123/2014


in this matter on the basis of news

article published in daily newspaper

"NaiDunia", Gwalior City Edition in

regard to illegal activities in and

around the premises of two

monuments of historical importance.

TAMIL NADU (MADRAS) HIGH COURT


1. Additional District Judge-cum-Chief Judicial

Magistrate,

MANU/TN/1842/2002


petition by treating a letter of

Additional District Judge as petition

which was sent to the court for

requesting the transfer of a particular

case to some other court.

2. B. Ramalingam, Formerly III Additional Judge, City

Civil Court, Chennai now functioning as Additional

District Judge-cum-Presiding Officer, Special

Court, constituted under E.C. Act, Salem,

MANU/TN/2085/2005

The court Suo moto initiated


contemnor for not abiding by the

orders of the high court.

3. C.R. Rajasekaran Vs. Judicial Magistrate,

MANU/TN/0219/2003

The court initiated Suo moto revision

petition on the basis of a letter

written to the Chief Judicial

Magistrate regarding the decision by

a lower court in which there was non-

compliance of the proper procedure.

4. Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority rep.

by its Member Secretary, Chennai Vs.

AbdurRehman, Hotel Nest International, Chennai

and The Corporation of Chennai rep. by its

Commissioner, Chennai,

MANU/TN/0359/2002


proceedings in this case in relation to

a number of suits which were

entertained by a lower court the

jurisdiction of which was expressly

barred under the said act. The civil

court did not have the jurisdiction

and the suits were still entertained

without looking into the issue of

maintainability of the said suits.

5. Dr. S. Ramadoss and two Ors.,

MANU/TN/0138/2003


initiated by the court on the ground

of disobedience in respect of the

orders given by the high court.

6. The Registrar (Administration) Vs. The State of

Tamil Nadu,

MANU/TN/6172/2006


and registered this writ petition as

public interest litigation on the basis

of a news item which was published

in "Daily Thanthi"highlighting illegal

transportation of passengers in goods

carriages.

7. In Re: The Chief Election Commissioner and Ors.,

MANU/TN/1955/2011


of the news item published in the

newspaper "The Hindu" wherein

certain statements made by the

Hon'ble Chief Minister of Tamil

Nadu alleging excessive restrictions

imposed by the Election

Commission.

8. The Registrar (Judicial), Madurai Bench of Madras

High Court Vs. The Secretary to Government,

Environment and Forest Department and Ors.,

MANU/TN/3125/2010

The court in this case took

cognizance of the matter Suo moto

on the basis of news reported in a

Tamil daily "Dina Malar" in regard to

the dumping of wastage materials

like broken plastics, used tyres, waste

papers etc.in large quantities in the

vacant place near the market situate

opposite to Thidirnagar Police

Station, Madurai.

9. In Re: Devan, Formerly the Inspector of Police,

MANU/TN/1474/2004



contemnor in relation to filing of a

false affidavit.

10. In Re: R. Kaaruppan,

MANU/TN/1418/2004


contempt proceedings against an

advocate for professional misconduct

11. In Re: S. Durai,

MANU/TN/2816/2002



contemnor for making false

allegations against the court.

12. In Re: The Additional District Judge-cum-Chief

Judicial Magistrate, Nagapattinam,

MANU/TN/3036/2002

The court took up these revision

proceedings Suo moto in respect of

whether the lower court which

decided the case had the jurisdiction

to try the case.

13. In the matter of Drunken Driving Vs. The Chief

Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu and Ors.,

MANU/TN/4098/2009

The court Suo moto initiated the

present writ petition with regard to

the news item that appeared in The

Times of India under the title

'CRACKDOWN ON DRUNK

DRIVERS HITS RED TAPE’ in

regard to the failure of the transport

department in effectively

implementing the provisions of the

Motor Vehicles Act.

14. R. JeevaJothi Vs. Inspector of Police,

MANU/TN/7815/2007

The court initiated Suo moto criminal

revision petitionon coming to know

about the irregularities committed by

aJudicial Magistrate, while

conducting an enquiry in a case.

15. Madras High Court Advocates' Association rep. by

its PresidentVs.The State of Tamil Nadu rep. by the

Chief Secretary, The State of Tamil Nadu rep. by the

Secretary Home Department, Mo. Kandasamy Singh

General Secretary All India Advocates' Association

(SC/ST/OBC and Minorities) and Women Lawyers'

Association rep. by its Secretary (Mrs.

KoviRamalingam),

MANU/TN/3080/2006

The court initiated this writ petition

Suo moto on the basis of a lettersent

by the Madras High Court

Advocates’ Association with regard

to appointment of a State and District

level committee to deal with

exclusive problems between police

and lawyers.

16. Nagarjuna Finance Ltd. Vs. Ashokraj and Anr.,

MANU/TN/0674/2000

The court instituted Suo moto

contempt proceedings.

17. The Principal District Judge Vs. State represented

by Public Prosecutor, High Court,

MANU/TN/8191/2006


proceedings based on the report

received from the Principal Sessions

Judge after inspecting the Assistant

Sessions Court, Panruti for the

purpose of deciding whether the

Assistant Sessions court has

jurisdiction to try a case which was

going on in the said court.

18. In Re: A. Venkatesan, S/o. T. Adikesavan, Assistant The court initiated Suo moto

Section Officer, Attached to Home (P&E)

Department, Secretariat, Fort St. George, Chennai

AND

Appellants: V. Arun, Advocate, S/o. Mr. M.

Vaithilingam, ChennaiVs.Government of Tamil

Nadu, rep. by its Chief Secretary, Secretariat,

Chennai and Others,

MANU/TN/2185/2012

contempt proceedings in this case in

relation to the code of conduct within

the court premises regarding the

usage of Cell Phone or any other

Digital or Electronic Device/Gadgets

having audio/video recording

capability in any mode, inside the

Court halls and the Court premises

19. In Re: G.S. Desingu, President, DRT/DRAT Bar

Association,

MANU/TN/2983/2013


contempt proceeding in this case on

the basis of a letter the contents of

which would clearly go to show that

a serious offence had been made out

and the same is not in the interest of

the Bar & the Bench, and is also a

clear and direct attempt to interfere

with the administration of justice.

20. In Re: V. Raghavachar,

MANU/TN/2548/2012


contempt proceedings against an

advocate for having committed

contempt of Court.

21. Krishnakumar Vs. The Chief Secretary to the

Government of Tamil Nadu,

MANU/TN/0997/2014


initiated by the court.

22. Peter Ramesh Kumar Vs. Suo Motu,

MANU/TN/2622/2013



contemnor for committing gross

contempt, obstructing the

proceedings of the court and also for

misbehaving with another advocated

in the court.

MANIPUR, MEGHALAYA HIGH COURT

No cases on Suo moto cognizance

TRIPURA HIGH COURT


1. Court on own motion Vs. Narayan Kumar Das,

MANU/TR/0493/2014

The court took up this case Suo moto

involving granting of anticipatory

bail. The petitioner who filed for

grant of anticipatory bail was denied

bail by the court of Additional

Sessions Judge, the accused-

petitioner was never arrested and he

filed another application for bail

within 10 days. The same court

granted the bail in this second bail

petition without any reference to the

earlier bail and there were no new

averments in the new bail petition.

ORISSA HIGH COURT


1. PravakarMohapatra and Anr.Vs.State of Orissa,

MANU/OR/0398/2001


initiated against a magistrate for

overriding the directions of the high

court.

2. The Secretary, Bar AssociationVs.Sri D.

Mohapatra, Executive Magistrate,

MANU/OR/0237/2003

The court Suo moto initiated criminal

revision proceedings in the matter

wherein a magistrate without

considering the submission of the

lawyer and without accepting the

offer of bail, passed an order of

remand and sent him to jail custody.

3. Registrar (Judl.) Orissa High Court Vs. State of

Orissa,

MANU/OR/0629/2010


Public Interest Litigation on the basis

of a news item published in "The

Times of India" under the head line

"Over 100 villagers lose vision after

cataract operation" in an eye surgery

camp held by a private organization

with the aid and assistance of the

district administration.

4. State of Orissa Vs. TarakantaMohapatra&Ors.,

MANU/OR/0314/2011


contempt proceeding against the

contemnors for wilful violation of the

order of the Court.

5. State Vs. Alekh Chandra Phai and Anr.,

MANU/OR/0605/2010

The court in this case initiated Suo

moto contempt proceedings against

police officials who misbehaved with

a high court judge even after

knowing his identity and the same

was considered to have lowered the

image of the high court.

PATNA HIGH COURT


1. In Re: Report of the District & Sessions Judge; In

Re: suo motu action against the Superintendent of

Police and Ors.,

MANU/BH/0071/2003

The court Suo moto took the

cognizance of the matter and initiated

proceedings of contempt for

criminally assaulting District Judge

and officers & employees of Court

establishment.

2. In Re: Sri Ram Krishna Pandey,

MANU/BH/0726/2004



contemnors forrefusal and/or failure

on their part to carry out the

undertakings/orders given by the

court.

3. In the matter of Suo Motu action by the High Court

of Judicature at Patna and in Re: the matter of the

citizens of the District of Jehanabad Vs. The State of

Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Secretary, Home

Director General of Police, Superintendent of

Police, Jehanabad and the District Magistrate,

Jehanabad,

MANU/BH/0148/2002

The court took cognizance of the

matter Suo moto in this case on the

basis of the news reports of almost all

newspapers which published the

report about police getting berserk

and had unmercifully beaten the

women black and blue.

4. In Re: Suo Motu Contempt against V.C. & Reg. of

V.K.S.U.,

MANU/BH/1025/2009


moto contempt proceedings against

the vice chancellor of the institution

for non-compliance with the

directions issues by the court.

5. In the matter of News reports published in the Times

of India, dated 26th June, 2006 Vs. The State of

Bihar &Ors.,

MANU/BH/0603/2006

The court took up the matter Suo

moto as public interest litigation in

view of the amendment and addition

of Section 436A in the Code of

Criminal Procedure, 1973, right to

bail to an under trial prisoner, which

came to be published in "The Times

of India”. This matter was initiated in

order to issue directions and take

measures for the effective and

efficient enforcement of the amended

provision.

6. Jai Kishun Singh Vs. Union of India (UOI) and

Ors.,

MANU/BH/0006/2006

The court in this case took Suo moto

cognizance on the basis of a news

item that was published in the daily

newspaper "Hindustan Times"

alleging that many undeserving and

ineligible persons are receiving

freedom fighters pension.

7. Suo Motu action by the High Court in a matter

relating to Fresh Water Dolphin Vs. The State of

Bihar and Ors.,

MANU/BH/0906/2001


in this matter on the issue that the

Gangetic Dolphin found within the

territory of Bihar in the river Ganges

and its tributaries are endangered.

8. Suo Motu action by the High Court Vs. State of

Bihar and Ors.,

MANU/BH/0432/2001


issued orders to the state government

to prepare a list of list of Mukhiyas

who may have been convicted of an

offence, or were inherently

disqualified under law so as not to be

the members of Panchayats.

9. High Court Legal Aid Committee Vs. State of Bihar

and Ors.,

MANU/BH/0652/2011


petition in order to comply with the

direction issued by Supreme Court in

the decision of Sheela Barse v. Union

of India and Anr. to High Court to

protect and improve the conditions of

the non-criminal, mentally

challenged women illegally

incarcerated in the jail.

10. In the matter of initiating contempt proceeding in

connection with obstruction of Court of Justice at

Civil Court, Patna City Vs. Gopal Prasad Singh and

Ors.,

MANU/BH/0072/2014


of the matter in this case and initiated

contempt proceedings where a

section of lawyers obstructed and

virtually paralyzed the normal

functioning of the Patna City Civil

Court. No judicial work was

permitted to be conducted by the civil

court.

PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT


1. Court On Its Own Motion Vs. A.J. Philip, The court initiated Suo moto

MANU/PH/0941/2004 contempt proceedings against a

newspaper in relation to publication

of an incorrect news item regarding

inclusion of name of a High Court

Judge in an FIR which was

considered as an attempt to cast

aspersions on the High Court as an

Institution to bring it to disrepute and

lower its prestige in the mind of

public.

2. Court on its Own Motion Vs. B.I.S. Chahal,

MANU/PH/0957/2009


moto contempt proceedings in

relation to the contemnor, the then

Joint Secretary of the Sports

Department, who interfered and used

his influence and successfully stalled

production of the original records of

the Sports Department before the

Court.

3. Court on its Own Motion Vs. ManeeshChibber,

Senior Correspondent, Hindustan Times Ltd.,

MANU/PH/0658/2004

The court in this matter Suo moto

initiated contempt proceedings

against the correspondent of

Hindustan Times in relation to an

attempt to spread rumours against the

sitting judge of the high court and to

tarnish his image.

4. Court on its own Motion Vs. Ajay Bansal and Ors.,

MANU/PH/0185/2004


contempt proceedings on the basis of

new item published in the Times of

India and in Hari Bhoomi, in relation

to undermining and tarnishing the

authority and the image of the high

court.

5. Court On Its Own Motion Vs. State of Punjab and

Others,

MANU/PH/1011/2012

The court Suo moto registered Suo

moto this writ petition on the matter

of a large number of convicts who

were granted parole and same

jumped the parole.

6. Court On its Own Motion Vs. Rachpal Singh,

MANU/PH/0526/2011

The court initiated this contempt

petition Suo moto on the basis of a

news item appearing in the edition of

Tribune, which referred to the

conduct of the alleged contemnor

with regard to flashing a pistol in the

Court of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class,

Gidderbaha, while facing trial as an

accused.

7. Court on its own Motion Vs. State of Haryana,

MANU/PH/0965/2011

The current case was registered by

the court Suo moto pertaining to FIR,

six cases were registered against a

juvenile-accused in Delhi and out of

six cases, juvenile accused has

already been discharged in four cases

and has been acquitted in one case

and in the sixth case, he was found

guilty and was sentenced to the

period already undergone. The

question was with regard to bail to

the said juvenile.

8. Court on its Own Motion Vs. Malook Singh,

MANU/PH/0415/2013


moto contempt proceedings for

violation of notice of the interim stay

granted by the court whereby the

person whose arrest had been stayed,

was taken into custody.

9. Court on its own Motion Vs. State of Haryana and

others,

MANU/PH/2488/2011

The court registered Suo moto writ

petition in this case on the basis of a

note of a Single Judge of this Court

in which the judge after having

inspected the Central Jail at Sonepat,

during the course of the annual

inspection, had suggested that

telephone/STD facilities in the jail

premises be provided to the inmates

on the same lines as provided in

Tihar Jail, Delhi.

10. Court on its own Motion Vs. State of Punjab,

MANU/PH/0090/2011


of a news item appearing in

Hindustan times highlighting that

SHO of Police Station was found

guilty in a judicial enquiry for

custodial death on account of

poisoning in Police Station.

11. Court on its own motion Vs. State of Punjab,

MANU/PH/2562/2014

The court Suo moto placed this

petition as a Public Interest Litigation

after a Suo moto notice was taken by

a Single Judge about the pathetic and

horrible sanitation conditions,

defacement and destruction of public

property by the residents of

Chandigarh, Panchkula and Mohali.

This Court after seeing various

photographs, which appeared in the

"Daily Chandigarh" issued the

proceedings.

12. Court on its own motion Vs. State of Punjab and

Ors.,

MANU/PH/1869/2010

The court in this case took up Suo

moto the writ petition based on the

notice of a single judge who while

hearing the criminal appeals noticed

that in some of the cases, the

remissions were granted to the

convicts more than the actual

sentence they had undergone, he

further noticed that the convicts had

been allowed remissions even in

heinous cases in a very

casual/liberal/lackadaisical manner.

The note of the Single Judge was

placed before the then Chief Justice

after which Suo moto notice of the

matter was taken.

13. Court on its own motion Vs. State of Punjab

AND

Hemant Goswami and Another Vs. Union of India

and Others

AND

The National Commission for the Protection of

Child Rights (NCPCR) Vs. The State of Haryana

and Others,

MANU/PH/0599/2013

The court took up Suo moto

cognizance in this case based on two

new items depicting appalling

conditions of the Children Homes run

by the Department of Women and

Children and the Observation Homes

run by the Department of Social

Security. The court took up this issue

in relation to the proper and effective

implementation of the provisions of

the Juvenile Justice (Care and

Protection of Children) Act, 2000.

14. Court on its own motion Vs. U.T., Chandigarh and

others,

MANU/PH/0885/2012


PIL on the basis of a noteof the then

Administrative Judge, Chandigarh

Division with regard to the

investigations remaining pending

beyond 60/90 days resulting in a

situation where the accused in such

cases are still languishing in jails. A

list of 58 cases where investigations

have not been completed was

enclosed with the note.

15. Rampal Singh Tomar Vs. State of Haryana and

Ors.,

MANU/PH/0790/2015

The court registered this case Suo

moto on the direction of the chief

justice on the basis of a complaint

received by him that the petitioner's

son had not committed suicide as it

was made out to be, but it was a case

of homicide. The complaint alleged

that there were several circumstances

in the case which were not properly

investigated.

RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT


1. Rajasthan High Court Advocate Association and

Anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors.,

MANU/RH/1382/2009


registered the public interest petition

for questioning the continued

lawlessness in colleges and

universities during student's union

elections.

2. Suo Motu Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors.,

MANU/RH/0318/2005

The court in this case initiated the

public interest petition Suo moto with

regard to the depiction of women in

an undignified manner by the media

and the television channels.

3. Suo Moto Vs. Rajasthan University and Ors.,

MANU/RH/1076/2007

The court registered this petition Suo

moto on the basis of a report that the

University Teacher’s i.e. Professors,

Associate Professors, Assistant

Professors and teacher who are

entitle to pension and other

retirement benefits on attaining age

of superannuation, are likely to be in

trouble because Pension Funds of the

Universities are drastically

squeezing.

4. Suo Moto Vs. State and Ors.,

MANU/RH/1331/2009


in this matter. This matter pertains to

famous Amer Fort and palace which

was declared as a protected

monument under the provisions of

the Rajasthan Monuments and

Archaeological Sites and Antiquities

Act, 1961. A mishap of falling of

wall causing injuries to the people

took place while film shooting was

going on, film shooting was instantly

stayed for the purpose of knowing

about the work performed in the

protected monument and other

aspects.

5. Suo Moto Vs. State of Rajasthan,

MANU/RH/0097/2005


in this matter wherein the regional

Newspapers reported about an

incident of rape on a foreign lady

tourist.

6. Suo Moto Vs. State of Rajasthan,

MANU/RH/0034/2007


of this matter on the basis of news

flashed in various newspapers

regarding rape of a German lady

tourist by an auto rickshaw driver.

7. Suo Motu Vs. Mahendra Kumar Sharma,

MANU/RH/0304/2007



Deputy Registrar (Judicial) in

relation to non-compliance of the

orders passed by the court.


MANU/RH/0426/2004

The court took up the Present petition

Suo moto in relation to the issue of

cleanliness of the Jaipur city which

has since been suffering from a

number of problems.

9. The State of Rajasthan Vs. Hem Raj Jain,

MANU/RH/0607/2000


contempt petition against the

petitioner in this case for his

representation to the Chief Minister

and the Law Minister of Rajasthan, in

which he made baseless, malicious

and scandalous allegations against

Rajasthan Judiciary.

10. Retired Agriculture Lecturers Employees of

Agriculture UniversityVs.State of Rajasthan and

The court initiated this Suo moto writ

petition on the basis of news item

Ors.,

MANU/RH/0819/2010');

that appeared in a daily newspaper

'Rajasthan Patrika' under caption

"SewanivrataKrishi Shikshak-

Karmchari Do Maaha Se Pareshan -

1100 Ko Pension Nahi" in relation to

the retired personnel of various

categories who haven’t been granted

pension.

11. Suo Moto Vs. Bharat Bhushan Pareek,

MANU/RH/0522/2014');

The court took up this matter Suo

moto in relation to call of strike given

by the Bar Associations at the

District Court, Jaipur and the High

Court, the judicial work in all courts

at Jaipur, including at the High Court

and many other courts outside the

Jaipur, hampered and paralysed for

one week due to the same.

12. Suo Moto Vs. Respondent: Manoj Sharma And anr.,

MANU/RH/0812/2013


contempt proceedings on account of

the disruption of judicial proceedings

by the contemnor.

13. Suo Motu Vs. State of Rajasthan,

MANU/RH/0357/2012

The court in this case took

cognizance of the matter Suo moto

taking note of alarming situation of

water scarcity in the city of Jaipur

focused in the newspapers indicating

reasons for premature death of

Ramgarh dam. It was not due to

natural disaster but on account of

large scale inaction on the part of the

State Government coupled with

illegal acts of others.


MANU/RH/1461/2014


of the matter based on the news item

published in English Newspaper

"The Times of India" (Jaipur edition)

with a title "Dirty lakes, dead fish

mark end of festive season"

appeared, giving details of the ills

suffered by the lakes of Udaipur city

due to ignorance of the residents of

the city.


MANU/RH/0888/2010


on this matter on de-acquisition of

the land of Prithviraj Nagar Scheme

at Jaipur. The aforesaid cognizance

was taken in the light of the fact that

earlier the State Government took a

decision to acquire vast chunk of land

for planned development of the

scheme named as Prithviraj Nagar

Yojna, when the said acquisition was

challenged, through appeal it went till

the apex court which held it to be

valid, even after that the land was de-

aquired.

SIKKIM HIGH COURT


1. In Re: Writer Constable 1626

DamberBahadurChhetri and Ors.,

MANU/SI/0006/2000


revision proceedings under orders of

the Chief Justice in exercise under

Section 397 read with Section 401 of

the CRPC, 1973 questioning legality

of the Judgment of conviction.

2. K.S. Gurung Vs. Ramananda Prasad and Anr.,

MANU/SI/0007/2000


revision proceedings under orders of

the Chief Justice for correctness,

legality and propriety of the order.

3. State of Sikkim Vs. Buglar Muslim, The court initiated Suo moto criminal

ANU/SI/0007/2001 revision proceedings for checking the

correctness, legality and propriety of

the order.

4. State of Sikkim Vs. Deepen Rai and Ors.,

MANU/SI/0009/2000


revision proceedings for checking the


the order.

5. State of Sikkim Vs. TekBahadurTamang and Anr.,

MANU/SI/0012/2000


revision proceedings for checking the


the order.

6. Suo Moto Vs. The Secretary, Ministry of Surface

Transport, Department of Road Transport and

Highways, Government of India and Ors.,

MANU/SI/0031/2010


and initiated this Public Interest

Litigation on the basis of the widely

reported news in relation to the poor

conditions of the National Highway

31-A, the North Sikkim Highway and

the Gangtok-Nathula Road

(Jawaharlal Nehru Marg) that had

persisted for a considerable period of

time causing grave inconvenience for

the smooth movement of traffic.

UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT

No cases of Suo mot cognizance/action.

LEVEL II ANALYSIS:

S. No. Courts Number of

Suo moto

action cases

Contempt

Proceedings

Public

Interest

Petition

Revision

Petition

Any other

1. Supreme Court 16 9 6 - 1

2. Allahabad High Court 13 7 5 1 -

3. Andhra Pradesh High

Court

10 7 3 - -

4. Bombay High Court 17 10 6 - 1

5. Calcutta High Court 4 4 - - -

6. Chhattisgarh High

Court

- - - - -

7. Delhi High Court 21 7 10 - 4

8. Guwahati High Court 3 2 1 - -

9. Gujarat High Court 6 3 3 - -

10. Himachal Pradesh

High Court

11 - 10 - 1

11. Jammu and Kashmir

High Court

- - - - -

12. Jharkhand High Court 17 3 10 2 2

13. Karnataka High Court 7 3 3 - 1

14. Kerala High Court 4 3 1 - -

15. Madhya Pradesh High

Court

1 - 1 - -

16. Tamil Nadu (Madras)

High Court

22 11 2 6 3

17. Manipur High Court - - - - -

18. Meghalaya High Court - - - - -

19. Tripura High Court 1 - - 1 -

20. Orissa High Court 5 3 1 1 -

21. Patna High Court 10 4 3 - 3

22. Punjab and Haryana 15 6 3 1 5

High Court

23. Rajasthan High Court 15 3 11 - 1

24. Sikkim High Court 6 - 1 5 -

25. Uttarakhand High

Court

- - - - -

LEVEL III ANALYSIS

56%38%

0%

6%

SUPREME COURT

ContemptPublic Interest PetitionRevision PetitionAny other

54%38%

8%

0%

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT


70%

30%

0% 0%

ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT


59%

35%

0%

6%

BOMBAY HIGH COURT


100%

0%0%0%

CALCUTTA HIGH COURT


33%

48%

0% 19%

DELHI HIGH COURT

ContemptPublic Interest PetitionRevision Petition

Any other

50%50%

0% 0%

GUJARAT HIGH COURT


0%

91%

0%9%

HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT


17%

59%

12%12%

JHARKHAND HIGH COURT


43%

43%

0%14%

KARNATAKA HIGH COURT


50%

9%

27%

14%

MADRAS HIGH COURT


50%

16%

17%

17%

ORISSA HIGH COURT


40%

30%0%

30%

PATNA HIGH COURT


40%

20%7%

33%

PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT


20%

73%

0%7%

RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT


0%

17%

83%

0%

SIKKIM HIGH COURT


Documents

9. Suo Moto Cognisance/Actions taken by the Supreme Court and