Legal Circles 08-10-2023

· ITNA HANGAMA KYUN BARPA HAI, BHAI!

Two recent instances deserve a careful consideration. One, investigation followed by arrest and police remand of the Rajya Sabha member and a big -wig of the Aam Aadmi Party, Sanjay Singh by the Enforcement Directorate; and two, raids followed by the arrest of the owner and some of the editorial staff of a news portal, NewsClick on the allegations of receiving money from foreign countries, especially China.

Both these developments have caused ripples in the political and journalistic circles. While the administration and the ruling political alliance consider these two events as a very serious matter concerning the ethos of ‘clean’ political climate and safety and security of the country, the other side political combine terms them as political vendetta and a direct attack on the freedom of expression.

Considering the prevailing geo-political situation in the country and increased threat perception from within and outside the country, it is but natural that the guardians of law and order would follow a strict regime and deal firmly with the people irrespective of their social or political stature in the matters of corruption and national security. On the other hand, the people sitting on the opposition benches in parliament have a valid reason to feel insecure.

Obviously, the freedom of expression guaranteed under Article 19(1) of the Constitution comes with a rider, i.e., it is not absolute and unbridled. It empowers in the very Article the government of the day to impose ‘reasonable restrictions’. Now, what is reasonable and what is not is a matter of perception and the context which generally go on changing from time to time. Thus, the imposition of reasonable restrictions by a government is a subjective matter. Where in 1975, the then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi totally curbed the freedom of expression and other fundamental rights, perhaps it was her perception prevailing at that moment of History. However, any arbitrary curtailment of a fundamental right should be condemned.

The 16 organisations of journalists all over the country have rightly expressed their concern over the raids on the offices and residences of all those matter with the NewsClick. They have in the same breath distanced themselves from any ‘genuine’ incidents of unlawful activities by their fellow journalists. However, the timing of the letter addressed to the Chief Justice of India by these 16 journalist bodies needs to be pondered over. Had it been in the normal course, without having a case on hand like NewsClick, the letter would have been a welcome act. The journalists being the conscience keepers of the country and the fourth pillar of our vibrant democracy, have every right to express their views on all matters including the fundamental rights. But, soon after the NewsClick episode coming out in open and ‘sermonising’ the Chief Justice of India is nothing short of the interference in the administration of justice and the 16 journalistic bodies will have to be held accountable for this overreach which is nothing but arm-twisting.

With regard to the arrest of Sanjay Singh for his alleged involvement in Delhi liquor scam case, it appears that except political motives, there is nothing worth opposing it. It is well known that liquor industry account for generation of highest black money in the country. The spoils of these black moneys are enjoyed collectively by the people in power and in proximity to power. The Delhi liquor scam is in fact, a tip of the ice berg. In fact, it is almost impossible for a political party in our country to survive without the blessings of liquor and film industry. Builders and big industrialists come next. Therefore, despite the denial by the ruling NDA combine about their non involvement in the matter, the fact remains that the people in power quite often than not are tempted to use the official machinery to their advantage. More so, when the elections are round the corner and a huge chunk of hard cash is required to win. Still, there cannot be smoke without fire. The very fact that other similarly placed people like Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia and his close aid have been languishing in jail since so many months is suggestive of their involvement in the said scam.

· BOMBAY - HC GRANTS BAIL TO HINDU LEADER

A division bench of Justice Revati Mohite Dere and Justice Gauri Godse recently allowed a bail application filed by Vaibhav Raut, a member of the Hindu Govansh Raksha Samiti and Sanatan Sanstha, who is accused under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) in connection with the Nalasopara arms haul case of 2018.

The court observed that the minimum sentence that can be awarded under the UAPA is 5years which can be extended up to life imprisonment. The appellant is in custody and has undergone imprisonment for the last 5 years, the court added. Out of 417 witnesses, only 4 witnesses have been examined by the prosecution so far.

· BENGALURU CONSUMER FORUM FINES Rs.20,000 TO A PHOTOGRAPHER

Stating that marriage photographs are precious, and that the photographer’s failure to produce the video amounted to deficiency in service, the District Consumer Disputed Redressal Commission, Bengaluru, awarded compensation of Rs.20,000 to a customer.

· CIC’S DIRECTION ON WIFE’S INCOME DETAILS TO HUSBAND

Reiterating the ratio in Rehmat Bano v/s Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, the Information Commissioner Saroj Punhani in a case Yash Malhotra v/s CPIO, Income Tax Department by an order dt. 27-09-2023 directed the Income Tax Commissioner to furnish to the applicant husband, with only the generic details of the Net Taxable Income or Gross Income of his wife to verify these details in a maintenance case.

· WIFE LIVING IN ADULTERY NOT ENTITLED TO MAINTENANCE: KARNATAKA -HC

A single judge bench of the Karnataka High Court has recently held that the wife cannot claim maintenance from her husband u/s 12 of the Domestic Violence Act, when she is leading an adulterous relationship with another person.

Dismissing the Revision Petition filed by the wife seeking to set aside the order of the Sessions Court, Justice Rajendra Badamikar said that the petitioner wife is staying in adultery. Therefore, the question of she claiming maintenance does not arise at all. Wife had based her claim for maintenance on the ground that she was the legally married wife . However, this ground did not find favour with the court.