The Supreme Court has asked the Punjab and Haryana High Court to first determine whether the Public Interest Litigation (PIL) against Pastor Ankur Yoseph Narula and others is maintainable, before proceeding to examine the merits of the allegations. The Court disposed of the petition filed by Ankur Yoseph Narula challenging the Punjab and Haryana High Court’s interim order in a PIL concerning allegations relating to religious conversions and other activities.
A Bench of Justice PS Narasimha and Justice Alok Aradhe requested the High Court to hear the parties and decide the objection to the PIL petitioner’s locus before examining the merits.
During the hearing, Senior Advocates Mukul Rohatgi and Dr Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for Narula, questioned Minhas’s locus to institute the PIL. On the other hand, Senior Advocate Mohan Rao, appearing for Minhas, submitted that the petition had been filed bona fide in public interest.
The PIL before the High Court raises allegations concerning religious conversions, foreign funding, money laundering, healing advertisements and other regulatory issues. It also seeks various investigative and coercive directions, including investigations by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) and the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).
The challenge before the Supreme Court arose from the High Court’s August 27 order permitting the ED to share two reports, submitted in sealed cover, with the CBI. The CBI was granted liberty to conduct a preliminary enquiry and submit its report to the High Court in a sealed cover.
The Supreme Court declined to interfere with the High Court’s interim order. However, it requested the High Court to hear the parties and decide the objection concerning petitioner’s locus to maintain the PIL, before examining the merits of the matter.
The Court clarified that it had not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. The Special Leave Petition was accordingly disposed of.
