Dear Group
1) We must satisfy ourselves that a notice has actually been issued to Umapathi. For section 10 of the Contempts of Court Act 1971 refers to the power of a High Court to punish for contempt of a subordinate court. This section has to be read with section 15 of the CCA since the motion will be made by the subordinate court to the concerned High Court. If indeed Umapathi has received any notice from CIC then I must speculate if Umapathi is not perhaps the victim of a hoax. (For instance in what form was this notice, how did CIC get his address for service etc. ?)
2) Secondly the contempt which Umapathi alleged he is put to notice of is not civil in nature but is criminal contempt, namely publication which lowers (or tends to lower) the authority of any court.
3) Thirdly the essence of contempt is that you can say anything (within reason) about a judgement, but not about the judge(s) who delivered that judgement.
4) I think many of our vocal "civilian" members seem to forget what THIS group is and what it stands for. We are not a gaggle of citizens, but an heterogeneous group of stakeholders in the RTI process, and we would certainly have many PIOs, FAAs and ICs amongst our members, and who by virtue of their office (unfortunately) cannot speak freely as some of our irresponsible members do.
Sarbajit
--- In rti_india@yahoogroups.com, "Ramnarayan.K" <ramnarayan.k@...> wrote:
>
> This is interesting.
>
> Umapathi ji, sorry i don't have immediate advice on how to proceed
> with what you should do. However your mail itself has raised some
> issues which are in between or below your mail.
>
>
> On 8/26/10, umapathi <umi_sbs@...> wrote:
> > Dear Members, I wish to bring to the kind notice of all members of this
> > Group that I have received a notice from CIC regarding initiation of
> > contempt proceedings under section 10 of contempts of courts Act 1971. The
> > reason for this is my posting on this group wherein I had complained against
> > the IC AN Tiwari ( pl see my earlier posting on the subject on 17th August
> > -2010 under the Thread "complaint of Misbehaviour against IC AN TIWARI.) The
> > printout of the said postings made on this Group website is also enclosed
> > by CIC with Notice. According to them , the last two sentence of the said
> > posting constiutes contempt of Courts.the same is reprodcued here " Now
> > they are acting as a corrupt public servants. It is high time, such
> > information commissioner should be exposed to public of their corrupt
> > motives.
>
> So mails from / on this list, which apart from being public, are also
> being brought to the notice of the CIC , and i suppose other
> "intelligence" authorities.
>
> My larger concern here is that such info, while not private, would
> still need to be brought to the notice of the "said" authoriries.
> Which would also mean we have reverse whistle blowers on the list or
> the said IC's are monitoring the activities of this list. Which in
> turn mean that people ought to be more careful about what they say and
> plan while on the list.
>
> >
> > I have been directed to submit reply within seven days or tender an
> > unconditional apology within seven days to IC AN Tiwari. In this connection,
> > kindly suggest your views and opinions regarding the legality of CIC notice
> > of contempt proceedings.Can our fundamental right to speech and expression
> > be curtailed by CIC by initiating the contempt proceedings on us ? can CIC
> > exercise such power? please suggest your views so that same can be
> > incorporated in my reply to CIC. Regards.
>
> What are the provisions of this "fundamental freedom of speech" where
> does that end and where does contempt begin.
>
> Regarding what the IC can and can't do am sure the other better
> informed people will advise better.
>
> However a few questions (please excuse use of words that are not
> judicially appropriate)
> 1. Are the precedents of IC / CIC contempt of court actions
> 2. What will the "punishment" for contempt of court involve
> 3. What is the applicability of Contempt of court - if the IC / CIC
> cannot implement this can they in turn be made actionable for
> "illegal" actions.
>
> ram
>
No comments:
Post a Comment