New Delhi: The Delhi High Court Wednesday expressed strong disapproval of a lawyer filing “habitual petitions” against alleged encroachment near mosques, and said the practice of “roaming around the city and filing a petition every day” disturbs the court and amounts to the misuse of judicial proceedings.
A Division Bench of Chief Justice D.K. Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia made the observations while hearing a petition filed by NGO Save India Foundation.
The petition was filed by advocate Umesh Chandra Sharma on behalf of the NGO. He also represented the organisation in the HC. The plea sought directions for the removal of alleged encroachments outside a mosque near a public park in Delhi’s Green Park area.
The NGO has filed several such cases in the past, and it is routinely represented by advocate Sharma.
Before the current plea, the NGO had moved the HC against alleged encroachments near the Faiz-e-Illahi Mosque near Ramlila Maidan as well. Advocate Sharma represented the NGO in this case too.
The Delhi HC declared a portion of the mosque complex illegal on account of it being on government land. In essence, that petition resulted in the court directing the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) in November 2025 to take appropriate steps.
This led to a midnight anti-encroachment drive, which triggered stone-pelting in the area, prompting police to arrest some locals. An anti-riot vehicle had to be deployed in the middle of the road with Delhi Police personnel patrolling the streets.
Preet Sirohi, an activist and member of the Save India Foundation, had approached the High Court seeking removal of alleged encroachments near the mosque complex. He is a recurring figure behind petitions against alleged encroachments near mosques.
Also Read: ‘Why did you let this happen?’ HC raps Centre for IndiGo crisis, asks how airlines can charge Rs 40k
Same NGO, same lawyer
On Wednesday, the petition filed by the same NGO and represented by the same counsel (advocate Umesh Chandra Sharma), raising encroachment issues in another area (Green Park), came up before the Bench.
The Bench said it was not inclined to comment on the matter at this stage but indicated its willingness to curb “this kind of practice” of filing repeated petitions regarding encroachments.
The court posted the matter for further hearing on 21 January.
During the hearing, the Bench also discussed the possibility of increasing the fees required to file petitions for “habitual petitioners”. At present, the filing fee stands at Rs. 50. The court indicated that such measures could be explored to discourage repetitive and routine filings that burden the judiciary.
Before rising for lunch, the Bench noted that it was increasingly concerned with petitions being filed every day by the same individuals, without sufficient legal or factual foundation.
Lawyer says ‘service to the nation’
The Save India Foundation was founded in 2021. Advocate Umesh Chandra Sharma, who represents the NGO regularly, submitted before the court during the hearing on the current plea that filing such petitions was his service to the nation.
He reiterated that public movement has been disrupted near the park as areas outside metro stations and service roads were blocked due to encroachments and waqf properties.
Sameer Vashisht, the standing counsel for the Delhi government, told the court the government did not trust the petitioner, while assuring the Bench that if directions were issued, appropriate action would be taken.
During the course of the hearing, Chief Justice Upadhyaya questioned the legal capacity in which the present petition had been filed, particularly after learning that the lawyer resided in Delhi’s Civil Lines.
While assuring that genuine cases of delay and negligence would be taken note of, the Bench deprecated the practice of “roaming around the city and filing a petition every day.”
The chief justice asked the lawyer to do some “proper social service” and questioned whether he wanted his “name in the Guinness World Record”.
He added that there were “better ways to serve humanity” and that such “misuse of court proceedings” by “filing 3 petitions everyday” needed to be curtailed.
Asking whether the lawyer saw “only one kind of encroachments,” the chief justice reiterated that “these petitions disturb us,” signalling the court’s growing concern over repetitive litigation.
(Edited by Ajeet Tiwari)