Public interest litigation cannot be pursued as a personal campaign when the petitioner's conduct shows lack of bona fides.

A PIL is not entertainable where the petitioner's antecedents and conduct show a personal campaign rather than genuine public interest. The Court noted the petitioner's history of detention under COFEPOSA, adverse departmental findings, and prior litigation linked to smuggling-related activity, and treated the petition as an attempt to pressure the authorities. Although allegations of forged customs documents were noticed and the authorities were said to be free to take proper action, those allegations did not justify entertaining the PIL at the petitioner's instance. The petition was dismissed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the public interest litigation was entertainable in view of the petitioner's antecedents and the personal nature of the grievance.

Analysis: The petition was filed by a person with a history of detention under COFEPOSA and adverse departmental findings, and the Court noted that he had previously attempted to use litigation against the authorities in connection with smuggling-related activity. The Court found that the present petition appeared to be part of a campaign to pressure the authorities rather than a genuine public interest action. Although the Court noticed the allegation that some customs documents may be forged and observed that proper action should be taken by the authorities, it held that such circumstances did not justify entertaining a PIL at the instance of the petitioner.

Conclusion: The public interest litigation was not entertainable and was dismissed.

---