[ad_1]
Judge JR Midha said the plaintiffs Chawla and two others abused and abused the legal process and wasted court time.
The judge said the complaint in which questions were raised about the health risks from 5G technology was “not maintainable” and was “full of unnecessary, outrageous and frivolous claims.”
The court said the lawsuit filed by the actress-environmentalist and others was for publicity, which was clear as Chawla posted the hearing’s videoconference link on her social media account, which resulted in repeated interruptions by strangers. The court also issued contempt notices against unknown persons and asked Delhi police to identify them.
During Chawla’s plea hearing on June 2, a man started singing some of the hit songs from the actress’ films and caused repeated interruptions in the virtual proceeding. On the judge’s instructions, the person was repeatedly removed from the hearing, but he continued to join with different names and started singing until the case was closed. The detailed judgment is awaited, but after its delivery, Chawla’s lawyer requested a stay of the verdict for appealing against him, which was categorically rejected by the court. Lawyer Deepak Khosla, representing the actress and others, questioned the imposition of costs saying it was without any legal basis and attempted to show a Supreme Court verdict.
“Very sorry. Rejected. The case is over. You have given your sovereign remedies. It would not be appropriate for a lawyer to comment on the order. As a lawyer, you should know your limits,” the judge said. .
The court, while issuing the order, said that “the plaintiffs have abused and abused the legal process and wasted the court’s time. A cost of Rs 20 lakh is imposed on the plaintiffs … It appears that the complaint was filed for publicity that is clear as Complainant # 1 -Chawla circulated the hearing link on her social media account, causing the proceedings to be repeatedly interrupted by strangers. ”
He said the cost would be filed by the plaintiffs-Chawla, social worker Veeresh Malik and Teena Vachani, with the Delhi State Legal Services Authority within a week and if unsuccessful, the authority can initiate the process to recover the amount.
The court said unknown persons disrupted proceedings three times and ordered the issuance of notices of contempt against them and asked Delhi Police to identify them, take action and file a report of contempt. conformity before it.
“No case is established to grant authorization to bring an action (…) or to bring an action as a representative because the lawsuit is flawed and untenable. The complaint is full of unnecessary, scandalous assertions and frivolous, â€he said.
The court added that Chawla and the other two not only failed to comply with the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), but also flouted several other warrants under the Code.
He said the complaint was unverified and the plaintiffs mentioned that only a few paragraphs were considered “true to their knowledge” and that the lawsuit was based on legal advice which is not maintainable and as required by law. law, the plaintiffs did not apply to the authorities claiming their rights and directly appealed to the court.
He asked them why up to 33 parties were added to the complaint and said it was not allowed by law.
On June 2, the court reserved its order on the maintainability issue of the complaint in which the plaintiffs asked the authorities to certify to the general public that 5G technology is safe for humans, animals and all kinds of life. organism, flora and fauna.
The lawyer for the Ministry of Telecommunications had said that the 5G policy did not fall under the category of public nuisance and that it was obviously not prohibited by law. The lawyer representing the private telecommunications companies said that launching 5G technology is government policy, and because it is a policy, it cannot be wrongdoing.
The lawsuit said if the telecommunications industry’s plans for 5G come to fruition, no person, animal, bird, insect and plant on earth will be able to avoid exposure, 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, to RF radiation levels. which are 10 to 100 times larger than what exists today.
“This lawsuit will reveal utter betrayal on the part of regulatory agencies who have been legally charged with protecting the health and life of the public, but whose actions reveal a total departure from their own statutory duty to advance the interests of the public. private … “, alleged the plea.
“Since it is widely accepted that ‘prevention’ is much better than ‘cure’, immediate action must be taken to protect humanity and the environment, in accordance with ethical imperatives as well as formal international agreements, before such damage does not really kick in, â€he added. It said.
[ad_2]