Bar and Bench Profile picture
Sep 23, 2020 β€’ 34 tweets β€’ 15 min read β€’ Read on X
Hearing Alert: π…πšπœπžπ›π¨π¨π€ 𝐈𝐧𝐝𝐒𝐚 π‚π‘π’πžπŸ'𝐬 𝐏π₯𝐞𝐚 𝐒𝐧 𝐒𝐂

Supreme Court to hear plea by Ajit Mohan @secondatticus ( @Facebook India Head) challenging Delhi govt panel summons to him regarding role of the social media portal in #DelhiRiots2020
#SupremeCourt
Facebook India chief has submitted that the Delhi Assembly's committee does not have the Authority to compel him to appear before it, since the same issue was already before a parliamentary panel.
@AamAadmiParty @ArvindKejriwal @LtGovDelhi @raghav_chadha
.@secondatticus is set to argue that
"is no law that empowers a State Legislature, including a committee formed by that Legislature, to take coercive action against any person unless it obstructs or impedes its legislative functions."
#DelhiRiots

barandbench.com/news/litigatio…
Bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Aniruddha Bose and Krishna Murari assembles.

Hearing begins.
SC poses a question.

The power in respect of these actions do not vest with these bodies, is that the point?
Senior Advocate Harish Salve for petitioner argues.

Salve: We have received two summons. I have two independent points

1. Privilege does not extend to this kind of inquiry
2. You cannot put me in the pain of punishment by asking me to appear.

#SupremeCourt @Facebook
(Salve reads the summons issued to Ajit Mohan by the Committee which requires his presence to "testify" and for his opinion)

Salve: I don't know whether they want him as a witness or an expert.
Salve: We wrote a letter on 13th September saying withdraw your summons you don't have the power.

(Salve reads the acknowledgement received in response of this letter where Mohan's presence was required again)

#SupremeCourt #DelhiRiots2020 @secondatticus @Facebook
Salve: Privilege is something to be decided by the Assembly. A committee cannot decide whether action on privilege can be taken or not.

(Salve highlights that non presence of Mohan was said to be deemed as "breach of privilege" in the summons)

Salve: This is a serious threat.
Salve: Important points we make are two fold ~

- I have a right u/A 19, and
- The Right to free speech includes right not to speak.
Salve: As a house you may decide whatever you want to do but if I do not want to participate and give my views before the Committee then... And please consider I work for a US based company. I do not want to comment on this politically sensitive issue.
Salve: Wall Street journal has accused Facebook of favouring a certain party but I don't want to get into all this.

My Constitutional rights under Articles 19 and 21 are violated when I am forced to come on oath and give my views.
Salve: As a house they may form whatever committee to look into an issue but when they are forcing me to come on oath and give me views and opinions and testify at the threat of punishment, this is completely contradictory.

#SupremeCourt #DelhiRiots2020 #Facebook
Salve: The moment you come to an inquiry of this kind, it is an inquisition and where is the authority of law?

A.14, 19 and 21 is clearly engaged.

(Salve now refers to Article 239AA(3) in relation to the special status for the NCT Delhi)

#SupremeCourt #DelhiRiots2020
(Salve argues that Public order and Police are two subjects that stand excluded from the power and authority of the Delhi Legislative assembly)

Salve: The disputes so far have centred around the power to make laws.
(Salve is referrong yo Articles 194(3) and 194(4) in relation to Powers, privileges, etc, of the House of Legislatures and members and committees)

Salve: In a constitutional framework such as ours, can a person be punished summarily without a proper trial and absent legislation
Salve: There is no question of recognising an action that impinges upon one's Article 21.

If you want to impinge on my rights then it has to be with the authority of law.

(Salve refers to the tests of laid down in Maneka Gandhi case)

#SupremeCourt #DelhiRiots2020
Salve: Breach of privilege is not exception under Article 19(2). Contempt of court, yes.

Justice Kaul: What is proposition you are making for which you are citing the judgment? We cannot decide this issue finally at this point which is why we posed the question.

#SupremeCourt
Salve: I have only two points to make

Does privilege extend to areas such as this?

If it does, is it compatible with my A.19 rights?

(Salve adds that no coercive action should be taken against Ajit Mohan)
Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi for @Facebook is now making submissions.

Rohatgi: He (Ajit Mohan) is not being summoned because he made some comments. He is being summoned because he is an employee of my client (Facebook)

#SupremeCourt #DelhiRiots2020 #Facebook
Rohatgi: If he (Mohan) does not go before the committee, it is not breach of privilege.

I personally as a lawyer have been called by Parliament for giving opinions number of times.

You cannot compel and say non appearance will be breach of privilege. There is no penalisation.
Rohtagi: They (the committee) have held a press conference where they declared Facebook guilty.

(Rohtagi reading the transcript of the press conference where Facebook was said to be "prima facie involved" in inciting violence)

#SupremeCourt #Facebook #DelhiRiots2020
Rohatgi: In the press conference they said that incriminating material was not taken down. If it was not taken down, then everyone has right to move the Court for it.

Everyday Facebook is told to take down material that is in violation of the laws. They could have gone to Court.
Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi is now arguing on behalf of the Respondent.

Singhvi: The case they are trying to make out, cannot be made out.

Justice Kaul: As far as notice is concerned, we are going to issue it. You argue on protective order or relief to be given or not.
Singhvi: Privilege and coercion is projected to get orders from My Lords.

Justice Kaul: You have given them the chance to by sending the orders (summons)

#SupremeCourt #DelhiRiots2020
Singhvi: Their whole petition is focussed on Articles 19 and 21.

Justice Aniruddha Bose: Article 19 can apply to Petitioner 1 (Ajit Mohan) because you are compelling him to say something.

#SupremeCourt #Facebook #DelhiRiots2020
Singhvi: This person is called ONLY AS A WITNESS and no coercive steps...

Justice Kaul: If you are trying to change the legal tenor then it must be in those terms. You may have to take a stand for this Committee... You may have to file an affidavit to clarify this.
Singhvi: The points I am making that can be taken on record are ~

1. only as a witness
2. No coercive action
3. Reason Facebook is called, not as an accused, but want to get safeguard measures from them as to how the platform will not be misused.
Singhvi: He is only being summoned as a witness.

Justice Kaul: This is not what you have said in the notices. You have advised them, advise them better and issue better notices.
Singhvi: I will rectify the order and address the deficiencies that are bothering My Lords.

Justice Kaul: I'm sure you will be able to remedy the notice. And in that press conference, if you have said those things, then you will have to take a stand.
Singhvi argues that the transcript of the press conference read out is misleading because it intended to show that Facebook was misused.
Singhvi urges the Court to record his submissions and points out that Ajit Mohan was required to be present before the Committee today at 3. On account of the hearing, the meeting is deferred.

Singhvi assures the Court that he will file an affidavit addressing all the issues.
#SupremeCourt issues notice on Ajit Mohan's petition.

Court gives one weeks' time to the respondent to file counter affidavit.

Supreme Court records that the Committee will not hold a meeting qua this petition till further orders.

Matter to be heard next on Oct 15.
[Breaking] Ajit Mohan was summoned as a witness, without threat of coercive action: Delhi govt's Peace & Harmony Committee; SC issues notice @Facebook @secondatticus @AamAadmiParty @raghav_chadha #DelhiRiots2020 #delhigovernment #Facebook

bit.ly/33RAeoD

β€’ β€’ β€’

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
γ€€

Keep Current with Bar and Bench

Bar and Bench Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @barandbench

Jul 29
Karnataka HC hears suo motu PIL case registered in connection with June 4 Chinnaswamy Stadium Stampede which left 11 people dead and injured over 50 people. Track thread for updates. Matter before Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice CM Joshi. Image
Advocate General Shashi Kiran Shetty says judicial commission has now submitted its report covering most of the issues raised, which has to be placed before legislature which is slated to sit in August.
DNA's counsel tells Court that it has challenged judicial commission's report on ground that commission did not follow natural justice principles and DNA's reputation is being affected meanwhile.
Read 21 tweets
Jul 28
Delhi High Court to decide on October 30 the petitions filed by Delhi riots accused Sharjeel Imam challenging trial court order framing charges and quashing of Delhi Police chargesheet in connection with the December 2019 Jamia University violence during the protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA).Image
Justice Sanjeev Narula briefly heard the matter today.
Advocate Talib Mustafa appearing for Imam - Revision petition is challenging the trial court’s order on charge. All petitions arise of the same FIR. There is a separate writ petition also. Even prosecutors have come up against the same order.
Read 8 tweets
Jul 28
Karnataka HC Division Bench hears appeal challenging single judge order directing National Law School of India University (NLSIU) Bengaluru to provide 0.5% reservation for transgender students in admissions until it comes out with its own transgender reservation policy. Image
Justices Anu Sivaraman and Rajesh Rai K are hearing the matter. Senior Advocate KG Raghavan appears for NLSIU, he says that the petitioner who whose plea the single judge order was passed was offered admission but he did not join and "missed the bus."
Raghavan: This was for the 3 year programme.

Raghavan tells Court that petitioner was told to pay the fee for admission to the course, and that he should fill financial aid form if he wished to avail financial aid.
Read 22 tweets
Jul 28
Supreme Court takes suo motu cognisance of a media report highlighting deaths caused by rabies due to stray dog attacks on children and the elderly.

Bench: Justices JB Pardiwala and R Mahadevan

#SupremeCourt Image
Justice Pardiwala: This is a highly disturbing news report titled β€œCity hounded by strays and kids pay price”. It contains extremely troubling details.
Justice Pardiwala: There are reports of hundreds of dog bite incidents from both cities and peripheral areas, many of which have led to rabies infections
Read 5 tweets
Jul 28
[Justice Yashwant Varma hearing in Supreme Court]

Supreme Court will today hear the plea filed by tainted Allahabad High Court judge JusticeΒ Yashwant VarmaΒ challenging the in-house committee report indicting him over the recovery of a large sum of unaccounted cash at his official residence in Delhi

#SupremeCourt #JusticeYashwantVarmaImage
A bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and AG Masih to hear the case today #SupremeCourt Image
Justice Varma has sought a declaration that the recommendation made by the former Chief Justice of India (CJI)Β Sanjiv KhannaΒ for his removal as High Court judge be declared unconstitutional andΒ ultra vires #YashwantVarma #SupremeCourt
Read 20 tweets
Jul 25
Supreme Court to shortly hear the case pertaining to release of #UdaipurFiles movie

#SupremeCourt Image
The Central government on Thursday told the Supreme Court that the movie Udaipur Files is about a particular crime and not against any particular community

barandbench.com/news/udaipur-f…
Justice Kant: Have you filed any Petition in HC? How did Mr Sibal say that it was filed. First go to HC and pursue and then come here. Now other side says he is satisfied with central govt order and he does not want to pursue the case here. So you go to HC now. Why waste our time.

Sr Adv Kapil Sibal: This can be transferred to the HC. I can go to the HC but matter was pending here.

Sr Adv Gaurav Bhatia: we are withdrawing it.

Sibal: that is fine ..we will challenge the Central govt order in HC
Read 12 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(