38.6c New Delhi, India, Monday, January 12, 2026
Top Stories Supreme Court
Political NEWS Legislative Corner Celebstreet International Videos
Subscribe Contact Us
close
Judiciary

SC Rejects PIL Against Arun Jaitley, Imposes Rs 50,000 Fine On ML Sharma

By LawStreet News Network      07 December, 2018 12:00 AM      0 Comments
SC Rejects PIL Against Arun Jaitley, Imposes Rs 50,000 Fine On ML Sharma

The Supreme Court on December 7, 2018, while dismissing a public interest litigation (PIL) against Finance Minister Arun Jaitley has imposed a fine of Rs 50,000 on advocate M.L. Sharma, who had filed the PIL.

A Bench comprising of Chief Justice of IndiaRanjan Gogoi and Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul came down heavily on advocate M.L. Sharma for filing frivolous public interest litigation petitions.

Advocate M.L. Sharma had filed the PIL accusing the Finance Minister of "plundering" the capital reserve of the RBI.

The Bench dismissed the petition stating we find no reason whatsoever to entertain this PIL and imposed the fine as Sharma continued with the arguments even after dismissal of the PIL.

Interestingly, before imposing the fine, CJI Gogoi acknowledged that Sharma had done some good work, but he was bent on destroying his reputation by persistently filing frivolous PILs.

You have done some good work and we all acknowledge that. Why are you persisting on destroying your reputation? What kind of prayer is this to restrain Finance Minister from using capital reserves of RBI.

Now what is happening is that because of this, when you come with a good case also, we dont entertain you, said Gogoi J.

This is not the first time that the apex court has berated Sharma, earlier in 2015, then Chief Justice of India R.M. Lodha had imposed costs of Rs. 25,000 and Rs. 50,000 on him on two separate occasions.

JusticeD.Y. Chandrachud had also rapped Sharma for filing a PIL with unfounded claims against Union Ministers including the Prime Minister and the Finance Minister in relation to the Nirav Modi scam.



Share this article:

User Avatar
About:


Leave a feedback about this
TRENDING NEWS


TOP STORIES

wrong-bail-orders-alone-without-evidence-of-corruption-cannot-justify-removal-of-judicial-officer-sc
Trending Judiciary
Wrong Bail Orders Alone, Without Evidence of Corruption, Cannot Justify Removal of Judicial Officer: SC [Read Judgment]

Supreme Court rules that wrong bail orders alone cannot justify removal of a judicial officer without proof of corruption, misconduct, or extraneous considerations.

06 January, 2026 07:43 PM
divorced-muslim-woman-can-seek-maintenance-under-crpc-even-after-receiving-amount-under-muslim-women-protection-act-kerala-hc
Trending Judiciary
Divorced Muslim Woman Can Seek Maintenance Under CrPC Even After Receiving Amount Under Muslim Women Protection Act: Kerala HC [Read Order]

Kerala High Court holds that a divorced Muslim woman can claim maintenance under Section 125 CrPC even after receiving amounts under the 1986 Act.

06 January, 2026 08:19 PM
delhi-hc-full-bench-settles-bsf-seniority-dispute-rule-of-continuous-regular-appointment-prevails
Trending Judiciary
Delhi HC Full Bench Settles BSF Seniority Dispute; Rule of ‘Continuous Regular Appointment’ Prevails [Read Judgment]

Delhi High Court Full Bench rules BSF seniority is based on date of continuous regular appointment, rejecting claims for antedated seniority due to delayed joining.

06 January, 2026 08:45 PM
borrowers-cannot-invoke-writ-jurisdiction-to-compel-banks-to-extend-one-time-settlement-benefits-kerala-hc
Trending Judiciary
Borrowers Cannot Invoke Writ Jurisdiction to Compel Banks to Extend One-Time Settlement Benefits: Kerala HC [Read Judgment]

Kerala High Court holds borrowers cannot invoke writ jurisdiction to compel banks to grant One-Time Settlement benefits, as OTS is not a legal right.

07 January, 2026 09:22 PM

ADVERTISEMENT


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email