“Right to Information ought to be available to citizens and non-citizens depending upon the kind of information which is sought and the recognition of the rights guaranteed to such class of persons under the Constitution of India,” court ruled.
Court: Restricting the #RighttoInformation to only citizens in the light of both terms i.e., citizens and persons being used in the RTI Act without any discernible distinction would be contrary to sprit of the Constitution as well as to the #RTIAct.
Court: Whenever information is sought by non-citizens, considering that the rights conferred under Section 3 is positively upon citizens, it would be on the discretion of the authorities to disclose such information or not.
“Section 3 would therefore have to be read as positive recognition of the right in favor of citizens but not as a prohibition against non-citizens,” Justice Prathiba M Singh held.
Under Section 3 of the RTI Act, "all citizens" have the right to information.
Court: While as a general proposition, it would be correct to hold that the right to information is conferred upon all citizens, it cannot also be held that there is an absolute prohibition on disclosure of information to non-citizens.
Court: The purpose of the Right to Information Act is to promote transparency and accountability in the working of public authorities. The statement of objects and reasons makes it clear that it was enacted with an intention to ensure smoother and greater access to information.
Court: The Constitution of India confers a large gamut of rights upon Indian citizens, but there also exist a smaller bouquet of rights which are also conferred and recognized in respect of non-citizens.
Court: …. non-citizens would have an interface with public authorities and to put an absolute bar, would be contrary to the principles enshrined in the Constitution of India which recognizes some rights of even non-citizens.
Court: The RTI Act places enormous emphasis on access to information and such information could also relate to the life or liberty of a person. Article 21 of the Constitution of India, which encompasses Right to Life, is available not merely to citizens but to all persons.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
#SupremeCourt to hear pleas seeking modification of existing guidelines in the process of designating senior advocates
Sr Adv Indira Jaising (one of the petitioners): Most issues are settled. Your lordship had asked us to file a brief synopsis.
Counsel: I have filed a petition against designation of Advocates as "Senior" under Sections 16 and 23(5) of the Advocates Act, 1961. It is listed on 20th Mar. If I am able to convince...
Breaking: BCI Permits Foreign Lawyers & Firms To Practice Foreign Law, Diverse International Law And International Arbitration Matters In India #ForeignLawFirmslivelaw.in/top-stories/fo…
Foreign lawyer or foreign law firms shall not be entitled to practice in India unless registered with Bar Council of India.
In all three cases, the prosecution presented two policemen, Head Constable Hari Babu and Constable Vipin Kumar as primary witnesses for identification of the accused.
In both FIRs resulting in acquittal, HC Hari Babu failed to identify the accused before court taking the plea of lapse of time & memory loss. The court then acquitted all of them observing that sole testimony of constable cannot be sufficient to assume their presence in the mob.
Sr Adv Sibal: Thank you so much. When I was a young lawyer, the kind of dialogue that used to go on in Justice Bhagwati or Justice Chandrachud's court was impressive.
BREAKING - #BombayHighCourt dismisses with cost of Rs. 25k a PIL seeking a CBI and ED investigation into the alleged "disproportionate" wealth of Maharashtra's ex-CM #UddhavThackeray and his family.
"We hold this petition is an abuse of the process of the law" -HC
A division bench of Justices Dhiraj Thakur and Valmiki Menezes dismissed PIL by Dadar residents Gouri Bhide (38) and Abhay Bhide (78).
Order
The petition is bereft of any evidence, much less evidence which would give a basis to this court to come to a conclusion that a prima facie case was made out for the CBI or any other agency.
@nupur_0111 The critical aspect of the offence of rape viz. 'consent' as opposed to 'compulsion requires a more nuanced consideration: Delhi High Court
@nupur_0111 Though it is universally accepted that consent given under force, coercion or duress is no consent in law since it is not free or volitional ...: Delhi High Court #consent