Mumbai: The Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court has dismissed a Public Interest Litigation seeking recovery of security charges from the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), through its Sar Sanghchalak Shri Mohan Bhagwat, towards the Z+ VVIP security cover provided to him.
The Court found no public interest involved in the petition, characterised it as a motivated petition, and held that it amounted to an abuse of the process of law.
The order was passed on April 20, 2026, by a Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Justice Anil S. Kilor in PIL No. 31 of 2026, filed by one Lalan Kishor Singh against the Union of India, through the Ministry of Home Affairs, and others.
The petitioner, who disclosed only that he was a citizen of India without providing any further details about himself, sought the following reliefs: a direction to the respondent authorities to forthwith recover security charges from the RSS, through its Sar Sanghchalak Shri Mohan Bhagwat, towards the Z+ VVIP security cover; a direction to comply with the mandate of the Supreme Court’s judgment dated February 27, 2023, in Union of India v. Bikash Saha and Others, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1227; a direction to decide representations/request letters made by the petitioner dated February 12, 2026, and February 27, 2026; and any other relief deemed fit in the facts and circumstances of the case.
Counsel for the petitioner, Mr. A.R. Ingole, relied on the Supreme Court’s decision in Union of India v. Bikash Saha and Others to submit that Z+ security cover provided to any person must have a reasonable basis in the form of a genuine security threat. It was further submitted that public money could not be spent on providing security cover to an organisation like the RSS.
The Court, however, was unpersuaded. It found that the petition did not disclose any public interest whatsoever. The petitioner failed to disclose the source of his information and did not state that he had conducted sufficient research as required under the relevant Rules. The Court noted that the petitioner appeared to have approached the Court solely on the basis of a newspaper report annexed to the paper book.
On these findings, the Court held that the PIL was clearly a motivated petition and amounted to an abuse of the process of law, and dismissed it accordingly.
Appearance:
For the Petitioner: Mr. A.R. Ingole, Advocate
For Respondent No. 1: Mr. K.N. Shukul, D.S.G.I.
For Respondent No. 4: Mr. D.V. Chauhan, G.P., with Mr. N.S. Rao, A.G.P.
Case Title:
Lalan Kishor Singh v. The Union of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, Through its Secretary, New Delhi and Others (Public Interest Litigation No. 31 of 2026, 2026:BHC-NAG:6103-DB)
![Husband Can Also Claim Alimony/Maintenance From Wife: Bombay High Court Orders Woman To Pay Alimony To Ex-Husband [Read Order]](/secure/uploads/2022/04/lj_2823_Divorce.jpg)
