Concerns have lately been expressed over the Kerala High Court’s decision to maintain the Information and Broadcasting Ministry’s order robbing Malayalam news station Media One of its airing licence after the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) refused it security clearance.
The court’s ruling “was based on a sealed cover’ envelope given by the MHA, the contents of which were not revealed” with Media One, according to the plaintiffs, which constituted a “grave infringement” of natural justice standards. Read on to learn more about the Sealed Cover Jurisprudence UPSC topic.
What is Sealed Cover Jurisprudence? UPSC Notes
The Supreme Court, as well as several lesser courts, has a tradition of requesting or accepting material from government entities in sealed envelopes that can only be accessed by justices. While the notion of sealed cover is not defined by law, the Supreme Court has the authority to apply it under Rule 7 of Order XIII of the Supreme Court Rules and Section 123 of the Indian Evidence Act of 1872.
According to the regulation, if the Chief Justice or the court rules that particular material be kept under secrecy or that it is of a confidential character, no party will be permitted access to the contents of such information until the Chief Justice himself decides that the opposing party be allowed access. It also states that information can be kept private if it is not regarded in the public interest to make it public.
Also Read: Russia Ukraine Conflict UPSC: Key Notes for Your Upcoming UPSC Exam
Sealed Cover Jurisprudence Key Points for UPSC Exam Preparation
The Supreme Court (SC) and occasionally lesser courts have a habit of requesting or accepting material from government entities in sealed envelopes that can only be viewed by justices.
Rule 7 of Order XIII of the Supreme Court Rules and Section 123 of the Indian Evidence Act of 1872 provide the SC with the authority to employ it.
According to the regulation, if the Chief Justice or the court rules that particular material be kept under seal or that it is of a confidential character, no party will be permitted access to the contents of such information until the Chief Justice himself decides that the opposing party be allowed access.
It also states that information can be kept private if it is not regarded in the public interest to make it public.
Official unpublished papers related to state matters are protected by the Evidence Act, and a public officer cannot be forced to divulge such materials.
Also Read: Cold War UPSC: Important Events, Reasons, Truman’s Doctrine, Iron Curtain & Much More
Previous Instances of Sealed-Cover Jurisprudence by SC
During the time of former Chief Justice of India Rajan Gogoi, documents were reviewed in a sealed cover in a number of high-profile cases.
In the matter of the disputed Rafale fighter aircraft acquisition, a Bench led by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi ordered the Centre to submit data about the transaction’s decision-making and cost in a sealed envelope in 2018. This was done because the Centre claimed that such information was subject to the Official Secrets Act and the deal’s secrecy terms.
In the case of the National Register of Citizens (NRC) in Assam, the supreme court ordered the NRC coordinator, Prateek Hajela, to provide period reports in sealed cover that neither the government nor the petitioners could see.
The Supreme Court had instructed the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) to file its interim report in a sealed envelope in the matter where the CBI’s former head Alok Verma and the national agency’s former special head Rakesh Asthana had levelled counter-charges of corruption against one another.
The BCCI’s probe team presented its findings in a sealed envelope to the Supreme Court in 2014, demanding that the names of nine players accused of match and spot-fixing not be publicly disclosed.
The Supreme Court relied on the material presented by the Maharashtra police in a sealed envelope in the Bhima Koregaon case, in which activists were detained under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act.
Criticism
Critics argue that it is incompatible with the Indian legal system’s ideals of openness and accountability and that it stands in opposition to the concept of an open court, where rulings may be scrutinised by the public.
Furthermore, it is maintained that denying accused parties access to such materials obstructs their right to a fair trial and judgement.
Additionally, rather than being standard procedure, sealed covers are dependent on individual judges seeking to establish a point in a specific case. As a result, the practice is haphazard and arbitrary.
Conclusion
Critics say that the process is incompatible with the Indian legal system’s ideals of openness and accountability and that it stands in opposition to the concept of an open court, where rulings may be scrutinised by the public. It is also believed to increase the opportunity for arbitrariness in court rulings because judges are obliged to justify their conclusions, but this is impossible to do when they are based on personal information.
What’s more, whether the state should be allowed such a right to submit evidence in secret when current rules like in-camera hearings already provide adequate security for sensitive information is a point of contention.
For more current affairs topics, visit UPSC Pathshala.
Also Read: mRNA Vaccine UPSC: Check Out the Information for the UPSC Notes and Excel the UPSC CSE!
