1 D.B. Civil Writ Petition (PIL) No.599/2010 Krishna Singh Rawat V/s State of Raj. & ors. 20.1.2010 Hon'ble the Chief Justice Mr.Jagdish Bhalla Hon'ble Mr.Justice Mahesh Chandra Sharma Ms. Naina Saraf for the petitioner. Through this public interest litigation, the petitioner, who is a practicing counsel of this Court, has prayed that a direction be issued to the extent that the respondents shall submit details of FIRs pending at various Police Stations in cases related to land mainly under sections 420, 468, 469 and 120B IPC and thereafter, the respondents be directed to constitute a separate cell to look after these matters and appropriate action be taken against accused persons within a period of one month. It has been further prayed that the respondents be directed to frame a policy whereby only established, registered and recognized developers be allowed to develop township and only through JDA any transfer or sale of plots be allowed and finally, it was prayed that the respondents be directed to make periodical review of these matters and a Special Vigilance Committee consisting of Superintendent of Police, retired Judicial Officer, eminent lawyer and Journalist be constituted to submit the report. The committee be further asked to submit the proposal for necessary changes under the Rules and Regulations. We start to deal with the matter from prayer no.3. As far as the changes in the Rules and 2 Regulations are concerned, the petitioner, who is a practicing counsel, must be aware that the State has Law Commission and it is the Law Commission, which proposes the changes in the criminal law. There is nothing on record to show that the Law Commission has been approached by the petitioner. As far as the prayer no.1 is concerned, it is a general prayer. There are thousands of Police Stations in the State of Rajasthan and the petitioner wants that cases under sections 420, 468, 469 and 120B be placed before the Committee to be constituted as a separate cell, without understanding as to how much time it will take and what should be the procedure for the same and ignoring the fact that there is already a cell which is known as S.O.G. If the petitioner wants to come in public interest litigation, he must make earnest efforts to find out whether there is any such cell for which a prayer is being made. There is nothing on record to show that any such efforts were made by the petitioner. With regard to prayer no.2 that the respondents be directed to frame policy, we do not find either in the pleadings or in the argument that any representation has been moved by the petitioner for framing of the policy before coming to this Court. The learned counsel for the petitioner has placed before us certain observations in pending matter before the Apex Court where a direction was issued by the Apex Court in the matter of minor girl and though FIR was lodged, but no action was taken. 3 As indicated hereinabove, very general and sweeping allegations have been made by the petitioner. There is nothing on record to show that FIRs have been lodged way back and no action has been taken. The pleadings do not indicate anything to support the general allegations. PIL is not meant only for such prayers without doing the home work, especially by the member of the Bar. If he wants to file a public interest litigation, it is his pious duty to look into the matters, do home work and then approach this Court. However, since the petitioner has only put-in few years of practice, therefore, we do not want to make further comment upon this or impose cost. In light of the above, this petition is dismissed. (Mahesh Chandra Sharma)J. (Jagdish Bhalla)C.J. Parmar