Re: [IAC#RG] IMHO, AAP may be banned after Delhi elections

Sir

There is a vast body of case law on the subject.

For convenience I can refer to the decision in IAC's very own "Veeresh Malik versus Indian Olympic Association" in Delhi High Court - which decision incidentally is the bedrock for political parties being brought under RTI.by CIC. Please read para 44 onwards from the said judgment.

http://lobis.nic.in/dhc/SRB/judgement/20-01-2010/SRB07012010CW8762007.pdf

In short, the term "include" is used to ENLARGE the language of the statute, and it usage is ordinarily not construed/restricted as "means" (as you have used it).

Nonetheless, the language of the statute under examination is perfectly clear on "foreign sources", even if we take the ordinary or dictionary meanings of the 2 terms.

"Foreign" means "from outside". If currency comes from outside India it is "foreign". This aspect was also clearly debated at time of amending the Rep. of Peoples Act in 2010.

Today when an NRI cannot vote from outside India, the question of his donating money from outside for political activity is excluded equally. We saw very well what happened during the Khalistani, Naga, Tamil etc. separatist movements which were foreign funded by NRIs to wage war against the Indian State. As patriots we cannot permit this and neither should we defend such dangerous propositions.

Sarbajit

On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 6:59 PM, Shanti Bhushan <shantibhush@gmail.com> wrote:

The use of the wotd include further show that if a foreign citizen had to be expressly included an Indian Citzen resident outside India could not be deemed to be included just by implication.Nobody can have the least doubt in the matter.

Sent from my iPad