In a packed courtroom at the Rajasthan High Court, Justice Sudesh Bansal delivered a sharp rebuke to a petition filed by 74-year-old advocate Puran Chander Sen. The petition, extraordinary in its sweep, sought directions to register an FIR against the Prime Minister, Home Minister, former Law Minister, certain media houses, and members of organisations like RSS, Bajrang Dal, and Hindu Mahasabha.
Background
Sen had first approached the police station at Govindgarh, Alwar, back in October 2020 with an application alleging that the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019 was unconstitutional and had triggered violence across the country.
He alleged killings, unlawful detentions, and widespread public disorder. When police declined to act, he approached the Judicial Magistrate, who dismissed his complaint for lack of jurisdiction. The order was later upheld by the Sessions Court. Not satisfied, Sen moved the High Court under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, effectively seeking transfer of proceedings and registration of a "Zero FIR."
Court's Observations
The courtroom heard arguments from Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, Additional Solicitor General R.D. Rastogi, and Advocate General Rajendra Prasad, all of whom opposed the petition. They termed the allegations "absurd, frivolous and vexatious," meant only to attract attention.
Justice Bansal read the application carefully. He remarked that the petition carried no details of specific incidents within the jurisdiction of Govindgarh, Alwar. Instead, it contained broad allegations without names, dates, or concrete facts.
"The allegations made by the petitioner are nothing but his own misconception and creative thoughts of his biased mind," the court noted. The bench went further, adding that an advocate, being an officer of the court, is expected to act responsibly and not use his position to foment "bogus litigation."
The court also referenced the Supreme Court's earlier ruling in Lalita Kumari v. State of UP, which made FIR registration mandatory in genuine cognizable offences. But Justice Bansal clarified that such protection does not extend to vague, non-specific, and politically charged complaints.
Decision
In the final order, the High Court dismissed Sen's petition, calling it "arbitrary, concocted and false." Costs of ₹50,000 were imposed on him, to be deposited in the Litigants’ Welfare Fund within four weeks. The court also gave liberty to the respondents senior political leaders and institutions named to pursue civil or criminal action against the petitioner if they so wished.
"The judicial process cannot be allowed to be misused by a litigant according to his own whims and fancies," Justice Bansal stated, making it clear that courts will not entertain what they see as politically motivated or publicity-driven litigation.
And with that, the courtroom proceedings closed, leaving a strong message about responsibility, both for advocates and for citizens who wish to invoke the power of law.
Case Title: Puran Chander Sen Advocate v. The State of Rajasthan & Ors.
Case Number: S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 3255/2025