New Delhi, October 28: The Delhi High Court has declined to entertain a public interest litigation seeking ₹50 crore in interim compensation from the Cockroach Janata Party (CJP) over alleged inconvenience and disruption caused to residents of the national capital by its protests. The court advised the petitioner to approach the Supreme Court, noting that similar issues are already pending before the apex court.
A division bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Nitin Wasudeo Sambre and Justice Sanjay Sharma heard the petition filed by advocate Rakesh Kumar Saini on Wednesday. The plea sought directions to the Central government and other authorities to initiate proceedings for imposing a collective or community fine on the party and compensating members of the public affected by the demonstrations.
According to the petition, the protests allegedly disrupted traffic and daily activities in parts of Delhi, affecting traders, commuters, office-goers and schoolchildren. The petitioner also alleged that the party and its associates continued occupying protest sites beyond the permitted period and violated conditions governing demonstrations.
The petition called for a mechanism to impose a community fine, arguing that compensation for affected citizens could discourage organisations from causing similar public disruption in the future. It also sought the appointment of a high-powered committee to invite compensation claims from affected residents and determine the amounts payable.
During the hearing, the High Court noted that more than 50 petitions concerning related issues were already pending before the Supreme Court. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Central government, also informed the bench that similar matters were being considered by the apex court. He referred to petitions filed by small traders who claimed that their livelihoods had been affected by the protests.
The High Court observed that judicial discipline required it to avoid proceedings that could result in conflicting orders while the Supreme Court was already examining related matters. The bench accordingly disposed of the petition and granted the petitioner liberty to approach the Supreme Court.
The High Court did not examine the merits of the demand for ₹50 crore in compensation or decide whether a community fine should be imposed on the party. The petition was disposed of because related issues were already under consideration before the Supreme Court.
