PIL in Bombay high court seeks removal of term ‘PM’, national flag and emblem from PM CARES fund

The PIL stated that as the trust is a private entity, the use of the name, flag and emblem violate the laws and rules governing the said symbols and hence sought directions for removal of the same

A public interest litigation (PIL) has been moved in the Bombay high court (HC), seeking directions for removal of the word ‘Prime Minister’, the national flag and the emblem from the name of the trust PM CARES (PM’s Citizen Assistance and Relief in Emergency Situations Fund) as it is a private trust and the amount collected by it does not go to the Consolidated Fund of India. The PIL stated that as the trust is a private entity, the use of the name, flag and emblem violate the laws and rules governing the said symbols and hence sought directions for removal of the same.

Bombay HC has sought a response and posted the hearing to October 25.

HC has sought a response and posted the hearing to October 25.

The division bench of justice AA Sayed and justice SG Dige, while hearing the PIL filed by Vikrant Chavan, Thane district president of the Congress, through advocate Sagar Joshi, was informed that the trust was formed on March 27, 2020, and though PM and various other ministers are its trustees, it is not a government body.

The PIL further stated that as the trust had been soliciting funds and had collected ₹3,076.62 crore for relief work by using the name and photograph of PM as well as the national flag and emblem to solicit funds, there was a violation of provisions of laws and rules governing the symbols. The petition stated that relevant provisions of the Emblems and Names (Prevention of Improper Use) Act, 1950, The Emblems and Names (Prevention of Improper Use) Rules, 1982, The State Emblem of India (Prohibition of Improper use) Act, 2005, and The State Emblem of India (Regulation of Use) Rules, 2007, were being violated.

The PIL further stated that the conjoint reading of Act of 1950 with Rules of 1982 clearly indicates that use of names and emblems set out in the Schedule of the Act of 1950 is prohibited except in such cases and under such conditions prescribed by the Central government. An embargo has been put on the competent authority itself to register any company, firm or body of persons bearing any name set out in the Schedule of the Act of 1950.

In light of the above, the PIL has sought removal of the name PM (pictorial depiction too), national emblem and flag from the site and name of the trust.

Additional solicitor general Anil Singh for the Central government sought time to file a reply, after which the court adjourned the hearing of PIL to October 25.