Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the preliminary objection to the maintainability of the review petitions could be sustained on the ground that the documents relied upon had been allegedly unauthorisedly procured, were protected by official secrecy and privilege, and were therefore liable to be excluded from consideration.
Analysis: The documents were already published in the press and had entered the public domain. Once the material was publicly available, the objections founded on the Official Secrets Act and on privilege under the Evidence Act lost force, particularly because the Court was not asked to compel production of unpublished official records. The right to information regime also reflected a legislative preference for disclosure where larger public interest in disclosure outweighed protected interests. The Court further held that even if the documents had been improperly procured, relevancy and public interest did not justify shutting them out in the absence of an express legal prohibition. The constitutional bar under Article 74(2) was not attracted on the facts as pressed before the Court.
Conclusion: The preliminary objections were rejected and the review petitions were required to be decided on their own merits, with the documents remaining available for consideration.