English हिन्दी
Connect with us

Latest News

Chief Justice Of India’s office comes under RTI Act, says Supreme Court

The Supreme Court confirmed today that the Chief Justice of India’s office comes under the Right to Information (RTI) Act emphasising that “in a constitutional democracy judges can’t be above the law”.

Published

on

supreme court

The Supreme Court confirmed today that the Chief Justice of India’s office comes under the Right to Information (RTI) Act emphasising that “in a constitutional democracy judges can’t be above the law”.

“The CJI is within the public authority. The Right to Information and Right to Privacy are two sides of the same coin,” the court said in a majority judgement upholding the Delhi High Court’s ruling.

The five-judge Constitution bench comprising Justices NV Ramana, DY Chandrachud, Deepak Gupta and Sanjiv Khanna had reserved its judgment on April 4 in the plea by Supreme Court Secretary General challenging the Delhi High Court’s 2010 judgment declaring office of the CJI a public authority within the meaning of Section 2(h) of the 2005 Act, hence amenable to RTI application.

In the last hearing in April 2019, Attorney General (AG) KK Venugopal, who was representing the Supreme Court’s Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), had submitted that sharing information connected with the collegium, which is under the CJI office, would make judges and the government shy and destroy judicial independence. CPIO is the authority tasked to respond to RTI queries related to the court.

The bench, headed by the chief justice, had wrapped up the hearing, saying nobody wants a “system of opaqueness”, but the judiciary cannot be destroyed in the name of transparency.

“Nobody wants to remain in the state of darkness or keep anybody in the state of darkness,” it had said. “The question is drawing a line. In the name of transparency, you can’t destroy the institution.”

In a landmark verdict on January 10, 2010, the Delhi High Court had held that the office of the chief justice of India comes within the ambit of the Right to Information (RTI) law, saying judicial independence was not a judge’s privilege, but a responsibility cast upon him.

The 88-page judgement was then seen as a personal setback to the then Chief Justice KG Balakrishnan, who has been opposed to the disclosure of information relating to judges under the RTI Act.

The three-judge bench comprising Chief Justice AP Shah (since retired) and Justices Vikramjit Sen and S Muralidhar had dismissed a plea of the Supreme Court that contended bringing the CJI’s office within the RTI Act would “hamper” judicial independence.

The move to bring the office of the CJI under the transparency law was initiated by RTI activist SC Agrawal. His lawyer Prashant Bhushan had submitted in the top court that though the top court should not have been judging its own cause, it is hearing the appeals due to “doctrine of necessity”.

The lawyer had described the reluctance of the judiciary in parting information under the Right To Information Act as “unfortunate” and “disturbing”, asking: “Do judges inhabit different universe?”

He had submitted that the top court has always stood for transparency in functioning of other organs of the state, but it develops cold feet when its own issues require attention.

Referring to the RTI provisions, Mr Bhushan had said they also deal with exemptions and information that cannot be given to applicants, but the public interest should always “outweigh” personal interests if the person concerned is holding or about to hold a public office.

Dealing with “judicial independence”, he said the National Judicial Accountability Commission Act was struck down for protecting the judiciary against interference from the executive, but this did not mean that judiciary is free from “public scrutiny”.

“This is not the independence from accountability. Independence of judiciary means it has to be independent from the executive and not independent from common public. People are entitled to know as to what public authorities are doing,” Prashant Bhushan had said.

The deliberations of the collegium in appointing and overlooking judges or lawyers should be made public and information can be parted with under RTI on case-to-case basis keeping in mind the larger public interest, the lawyer had said.

The bench had said people, of late, were opting out and do not want to become judges because of the fear of negative publicity.

“On interaction, the reason appears to be the possibility of the negative observations, whether rightly or wrongly, being brought into the public domain,” it had observed.

In such a case, besides losing judgeship and reputation, the professional and family life of the person are adversely affected, it had said.

The top court had said it had brought about changes in the functioning of the collegium system and said now members have started interacting with prospective candidates.

Entertainment

Kapil Sharma warned by MNS for referring to Mumbai as Bombay on Netflix show

Published

on

Bollywood comedian Kapil Sharma has come under the radar of the Maharashtra Navnirman Sena (MNS) after the use of the term Bombay instead of Mumbai on his Netflix show The Great Indian Kapil Show. MNS spokesperson Ameya Khopkar issued a warning, stating that the usage of the city’s former name could hurt the sentiments of its residents and demanded that the correct name, Mumbai, be used.

The controversy arose during an episode featuring actress Huma Qureshi, her brother Saqib Saleem, and the Shetty sisters. While talking about her bond with Saqib, Qureshi referred to the city as Bombay, explaining that she felt at home with him despite not being originally from the city. This comment drew criticism from the MNS, who have historically been vocal about protecting the identity and pride of Mumbai.

In a post on X, Khopkar stated in Marathi, that even though 30 years have passed since Bombay was officially renamed Mumbai, the term Bombay is still frequently used by celebrity guests on The Kapil Sharma Show, Delhi-based Rajya Sabha MPs, show anchors, and in many Hindi films. He noted that the name change was officially recognized by the Maharashtra government in 1995 and by the Central Government in 1996, preceding similar renamings in other major cities such as Chennai, Bengaluru, and Kolkata.

Khopkar further emphasized the seriousness of the matter during a media interaction in Mumbai. He stated that Sharma had been working in Mumbai for many years and described the city as his land of work. He added that the people of Mumbai admire him and watch his shows, and warned that the city and its residents should not be insulted, cautioning Sharma against repeating the mistake.

He added that if the reference had been made unintentionally, the mistake should be corrected immediately. Khopkar stated that all guests on the show, including celebrities and the host, should be informed in advance to refer to the city as Mumbai. He warned that if this is not followed, the MNS would launch a strong agitation.

The Great Indian Kapil Show has recently been renewed for a third season. Its first two seasons, comprising 13 episodes each, premiered in 2024, featuring a mix of Bollywood celebrities and entertainers. The controversy marks one of the few instances where the city’s political groups have publicly intervened over the naming of Mumbai on popular entertainment platforms.

Continue Reading

Latest News

Indian-origin motel manager beheaded in the US

Published

on

In a horrifying incident in Dallas, Texas, an Indian-origin motel manager, Chandra Nagamallaiah, was brutally beheaded by a guest following an argument over a malfunctioning washing machine. The gruesome attack was carried out by 37-year-old Yordanis Cobos-Martinez in front of Nagamallaiah’s wife and children, leaving the family traumatized.

According to court records and affidavits, the confrontation began when Nagamallaiah reportedly told Cobos-Martinez not to use a broken washing machine at the Downtown Suites motel. The suspect became enraged, partly because the manager relied on a woman present for translation instead of speaking directly to him. Surveillance footage later revealed Cobos-Martinez producing a machete and repeatedly stabbing and cutting Nagamallaiah, despite the efforts of his wife and child to intervene.

The affidavit details that the victim tried to flee to the motel’s front office while screaming for help, but the attacker followed him and continued the assault. Cobos-Martinez removed Nagamallaiah’s key card and cellphone before ultimately beheading him. Disturbing footage reportedly shows the suspect kicking the severed head across the ground before throwing it into a trash bin.

Cobos-Martinez, a Cuban national with a long criminal history, including convictions for grand theft, carjacking, false imprisonment, and sexual offenses, was arrested shortly after the attack. Authorities found him a block away wearing a blood-soaked T-shirt, along with the victim’s key card and cellphone. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officials noted that Cobos-Martinez should not have been in the country at the time, as previous attempts to deport him to Cuba were unsuccessful due to his criminal record.

The Department of Homeland Security described the beheading as unthinkable and stated that the case highlights the critical need for strict immigration enforcement. A witness to the attack told NBC DFW that they could not explain what they saw, describing the suspect as appearing there and not there at the same time, emphasizing the surreal and terrifying nature of the crime.

This shocking incident has left the Dallas community and Nagamallaiah’s family in deep distress, as authorities continue their investigation into the motive and circumstances surrounding the brutal murder.

Continue Reading

India News

AAP MP Sanjay Singh accuses J&K authorities of house arrest, Farooq Abdullah condemns move

Published

on

Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) MP Sanjay Singh on Thursday accused Jammu and Kashmir Lieutenant Governor Manoj Sinha of placing him under house arrest while he was in Srinagar to protest the detention of the party’s sole J&K MLA, Mehraj Malik.

Singh climbed the gate of a government guest house in Srinagar to meet National Conference (NC) chief Farooq Abdullah and later shared visuals of the interaction on social media. He said it was a very sad thing that Abdullah, who has served multiple terms as Chief Minister of Jammu and Kashmir, came to meet him at the guest house after learning about his alleged house arrest but was not allowed to do so. Singh further questioned the authorities’ actions, asking whether if this is not dictatorship, then what it is.

Malik, the MLA from Doda Assembly seat, has been detained under the Public Safety Act (PSA) on charges of disturbing public order. This marks the first instance of a sitting lawmaker being booked under the PSA, which allows authorities to detain individuals without charge or trial for up to two years. Singh alleged that Mr. Malik’s detention was retaliation for raising people’s issues in his constituency.

Abdullah also condemned the attempts to stop Singh from holding his protest. In a statement to news agency ANI, he said that preventing Singh from exercising his right to protest was absolutely wrong and accused the Lieutenant Governor Sinha of misusing his powers. He stressed that the right to protest is guaranteed by the Constitution of India, noting that Jammu and Kashmir being a union territory gives the LG significant authority, which, according to him, was being used for the wrong purposes. Abdullah questioned whether it was necessary to prevent Singh from speaking and asserted that this is not an autocracy, there is a constitution here.

Abdullah drew parallels with the recent unrest in Nepal, where protests led to the resignation of Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli, and cautioned that India must safeguard its Constitution to prevent similar circumstances. He urged the LG to uphold constitutional principles, warning that failure to do so could risk unrest, and emphasized the need to take care of the Constitution before such a fire breaks out in the country.

Other opposition leaders, including AAP chief Arvind Kejriwal and Shiv Sena (UBT) leader Sanjay Raut, also expressed concern over the move, condemning what they described as an infringement on democratic rights.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com