41. That Where the public functionaries were involved in such a malafide and colourable exercise of power that may abridge or abrogate the right of livelihood of a citizen duly guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution. 42. That we are now slave of destructive elements and foreign ambitions. Politicians act in nefarious designs with impunity. Political parties motivated with vested interests are dancing to usurp power through any means, fair or foul even at the cost of sacrificing the Nation’s existence to personal interest. Party systems have pushed to advance its own schemes upon the ruin of the rest. Our politicians are Mafia dons next to the invaders. Robbers have generally plundered the rich who are seldom subjected to legislation always plunder the common citizens and protect those Mafia dons under the phraseology of “law making sovereign power” having the connotation “procedure establish under law to be cherished instead of due process”. That the Freedom of expression may be necessarily including right of information. There is no expression with out having an idea on the subject, regarding which the expression of an individual may be given effect to change the existing values an ideology which are based on the notable extracts of certain facts .An enlightening informed citizen would undoubtedly enhance democratic values (People’s Union for Civil liberty (P U C L) Vs. Union of India) (2003) 4 SCC Para 94. 43. That “The freedom of speech and expression is basic to indivisible from a democratic polity .It includes right to impart and receive information. Restriction to the said right could be only as provided in article 19(2). Right of a voter to know the bio-data of the candidate is the foundation of the democracy. The old dictum let the people have the truth and the freedom to discuss it and all will go well with the Government should prevail. The true test for deciding the validity of the Act is whether it takes away or abridges fundamental right of the citizens. If there is direct abridgement of the fundamental right of freedom of speech and expression, the law would be invalid. If the provisions of the law violate the constitutional provisions, they have to be struck down and that is what is required to be done in the present case .It is made clear that no provision is nullified on the ground that the Court does not approve the underlying policy of the enactment. (Para 69 to 71 and 66). (People’s Union for Civil liberties (P U C L) Vs. Union of India, (2003) 4 SCC 399:AIR 2003 SC 2363. The right to live with human dignity free from exploitation (A.I.R 1980 S. C 849) and the right of livelihood (A.I.R 1986 S. C. 180) respectively was also considered to be within ambit of article 21. Every endeavor has been provided till now to make this article reverberate with life and articulate with meaning. 44. It has been held that authority not performing their statutory duties to enforce laws for the protection of environment inre- J.T 1996 (2) S. C 196 and J.T 1996 (7) S. C. 775 are jeopardizing the right of life of the citizen. However the authorities have still to provide protection by providing a fool proof. The constitution is required to kept young energetic and alive .The attempt be endure to expand the ambit of fundamental right. It is said that the dignity of the ocean lies not in its fury capable of causing destruction, but in its vast extent and depth with enormous tolerance. Thus the wider the power, the higher the need of caution and care, while exercising the power. 45. They have the threat of being subjected to atrocities if the drastic step to save the citizens from the oppression and exposure of falsehood may not be done at an earliest time. Thus every nationalist who has got a slightest patriotic cult in his inhibition has got a Fundamental Right and a Constitutional Duty to safe guard our cultural heritage against the falsehood. Imparting of education is a State function. The State, however, having regard to its financial and other constraints is not always in a position to perform its duties. The function of imparting education has been, to a large extent, taken over by the citizens themselves. Some do it as pure charity; some do it for protection. Now the sovereignty is attributed upon the three institution namely the legislature, the executive and the judiciary. The combined effect of the three institutions makes a democratic society. The legislature is creature like lord Brahma while the executives like lord Vishnu may provide the welfare to the public. The judicial institutions like lord Shiva is the dispenser of justice and is also the protector of all subjects. The law of retributive justice wakes when the people sleep. Hence wise men regard the law or punishment as virtue or religion. 46. The constitution as it stands does not proceed on the “melting pot “theory while it represents a “salad bowls” where there is homogeneity without any obliteration of identity. The foundation of the religion is spiritualism, which is based on trust and confidence and an ability to strive for the good self of the other individual. The freedom of speech and expression is basic to indivisible from a democratic polity .It includes right to impart and receive information. Restriction to the said right could be only as provided in article 19(2) to (6) of our Costitution. Right of a voter to know the bio-data of the candidate is the foundation of the democracy. The old dictum let the people have the truth and the freedom to discuss it and all will go well with the Government should prevail. The true test for deciding the validity of the Act is whether it takes away or abridges fundamental right of the citizens. If there is direct abridgement of the fundamental right of freedom of speech and expression, the law would be invalid. If the provisions of the law violate the constitutional provisions, they have to be struck down and that is what is required to be done in the present case .It is made clear that no provision is nullified on the ground that the Court does not approve the underlying policy of the enactment. 47. The people of our country has right to know every public Act and the principle of finality may not be insisted upon as the maxim “interest reipublicae ut sit finis litiun”. Wisdom and advisability of public policy may be demonstrated in order to given effect to the statutory provisions under our constitution. “To control the ill effects of money power and muscle power the commissions recommend that even the election system should be overhauled and drastically changed lest democracy would become a teasing illusion to common citizens of this country. Not only a half hearted attempt in the direction of the reform of the election system is to be taken as has been done by the present legislation by amending some provisions of the act here and there, but a much improved election system is required to be evolved to make the election process both transparent and accountable as that influence of tainted money and physical force of criminals do not make democracy a farce the citizens fundamental “Right to Information” should be recognized and fully effectuated (Para 127) (People’s Union for Civil liberties (P U C L) Vs. Union of India,(2003) 4 SCC 399:AIR 2003 SC 2363. 48. The ambit and scope of “Right to Know “ is conferred fundamental right under article19 (1)(a) of the Constitution of India read with the provision of Freedom of Information Act,2002 .The right to get information in democracy is recognized all throughout and it is a natural right flowing from the concept of democracy itself Freedom of expression may be necessarily include right of information. There is no expression with out having an idea on the subject, regarding which the expression of an individual may be given effect to change the existing values an ideology which are based on the notable extracts of certain facts. Justice is a virtue, which transcends all barriers in the way of administration of justice. This is the acknowledged position of law that no party can be forced to suffer for the inaction or omission on the part of law enforcement agencies and whosoever he may be strong. Every decision will be passed according to the procedure established by law. Thus the law has to bend before justice. No court can restore the broken heart of the justice and he should provide such protection, which is necessary for them like dutiful parents. It is fundamental that if rule of law is to have any meaning and content, the authority of the court or a statutory authority and the confidence of the public in them should not be allowed to be shaken, diluted or undermined. The courts of justice and all tribunals exercising judicial functions from the highest to the lowest are by their Constitution entrusted with functions directly connected with the administration of justice. It is that expectation and confidence of all those, who have or are likely to have business in that court or tribunal, which should be maintained so that the court/tribunal perform all their functions on a higher level of rectitude without fear or favour, affection or ill-will. 49. That It has been held that “The newspapers serve as a medium of exercise of freedom of speech. The right of its shareholder to have a free press is a fundamental right. Advertisements in newspapers play an important role in the matter of revenue of the newspaper and have a direct nexus with its circulation. For the purpose of meeting the costs of the newsprint as also for meeting other financial liabilities, which would include the liability to pay wages, allowances and gratuity etc. To the working journalist as also liability to pay a reasonable profit to the share holders vis-a-vis making the newspapers available to the readers at a price at which they can afford to purchase it , the petitioners have no other option but to collect more funds by publishing commercial and other advertisements in the newspaper.(Paras 33,36,34and 38) .Hindustan Times Vs State of U. P.(2003) 1 SCC 591,AIR 2003 SC 250,(2003) 1 LLJ 206: (2002) 258 ITR 469. 50. That under these circumstances, it is most respectfully prayed that the decision on the disqualification as contemplated under Article 102 (1) (d ) read with Article 9 of the Constitution of India may be directed to be taken by the Respondent No. 2 for its recommending to the matter to the President of India regarding adherence of the Respondent No. 4 with Foreign Country as per her own affidavit submitted in respect of her family assets and since the election process has been commenced , the counting and declaration of the result may be differed till such decision.
Posted on: Sun, 22 Sep 2013 12:50:26 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015