Plea on CIC's power to try for perjury, HC seeks case laws
The Delhi High Court today asked a lawyer to provide case laws in support of his plea that the Central Information Commission (CIC) was legally empowered to prosecute an entity or a person for the offence of perjury if false documents are filed before it.
"Provide direct judgments (of HC and the SC) on the issue. Put up for further hearing on September 30," Justice Rajiv Shakdher told Shanmuga Patro, a Delhi-based lawyer who has filed the petition.
During the hearing, Patro cited some judgments and said any panel or tribunal, established under a law, can be treated as a court for initiating prosecution for offences like perjury if somebody files false documents before it.
Earlier, the court had issued a notice to the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) on the plea of Patro that the apex transparency panel be declared as a court in terms of a Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) provision so that it can prosecute a person or an entity for the offence of perjury.
The petition has alleged the CIC refused to initiate prosecution for the offence of perjury against Rajiv Gandhi Foundation (RGF), "its aides and affiliates for filing forged and fabricated documents in evidence" before the panel.
The CIC had, in its December 9, 2011 order, said that "without going into the merits of the case, first of all it becomes necessary for the Commission to see the source of its power to invoke section 340 (perjury) of (CrPC) ...
"Nothing has been stated in the said application (of Patro) about the powers of the Commission but in our opinion, the Commission cannot take cognizance of a complaint under section 340 of CrPC as such explicit powers have not been granted to the Commission under the Right to Information Act, 2005. Hence, the Commission is constrained to decline the requested relief.
Plea on CIC's power to try for perjury, HC seeks case laws
The Delhi High Court today asked a lawyer to provide case laws in support of his plea that the Central Information Commission (CIC) was legally empowered to prosecute an entity or a person for the offence of perjury if false documents are filed before it.
"Provide direct judgments (of HC and the SC) on the issue. Put up for further hearing on September 30," Justice Rajiv Shakdher told Shanmuga Patro, a Delhi-based lawyer who has filed the petition.
During the hearing, Patro cited some judgments and said any panel or tribunal, established under a law, can be treated as a court for initiating prosecution for offences like perjury if somebody files false documents before it.
Earlier, the court had issued a notice to the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) on the plea of Patro that the apex transparency panel be declared as a court in terms of a Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) provision so that it can prosecute a person or an entity for the offence of perjury.
The petition has alleged the CIC refused to initiate prosecution for the offence of perjury against Rajiv Gandhi Foundation (RGF), "its aides and affiliates for filing forged and fabricated documents in evidence" before the panel.
The CIC had, in its December 9, 2011 order, said that "without going into the merits of the case, first of all it becomes necessary for the Commission to see the source of its power to invoke section 340 (perjury) of (CrPC) ...
"Nothing has been stated in the said application (of Patro) about the powers of the Commission but in our opinion, the Commission cannot take cognizance of a complaint under section 340 of CrPC as such explicit powers have not been granted to the Commission under the Right to Information Act, 2005. Hence, the Commission is constrained to decline the requested relief.
Plea on CIC's power to try for perjury, HC seeks case laws
The Delhi High Court today asked a lawyer to provide case laws in support of his plea that the Central Information Commission (CIC) was legally empowered to prosecute an entity or a person for the offence of perjury if false documents are filed before it.
"Provide direct judgments (of HC and the SC) on the issue. Put up for further hearing on September 30," Justice Rajiv Shakdher told Shanmuga Patro, a Delhi-based lawyer who has filed the petition.
During the hearing, Patro cited some judgments and said any panel or tribunal, established under a law, can be treated as a court for initiating prosecution for offences like perjury if somebody files false documents before it.
Earlier, the court had issued a notice to the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) on the plea of Patro that the apex transparency panel be declared as a court in terms of a Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) provision so that it can prosecute a person or an entity for the offence of perjury.
The petition has alleged the CIC refused to initiate prosecution for the offence of perjury against Rajiv Gandhi Foundation (RGF), "its aides and affiliates for filing forged and fabricated documents in evidence" before the panel.
The CIC had, in its December 9, 2011 order, said that "without going into the merits of the case, first of all it becomes necessary for the Commission to see the source of its power to invoke section 340 (perjury) of (CrPC) ...
"Nothing has been stated in the said application (of Patro) about the powers of the Commission but in our opinion, the Commission cannot take cognizance of a complaint under section 340 of CrPC as such explicit powers have not been granted to the Commission under the Right to Information Act, 2005. Hence, the Commission is constrained to decline the requested relief.
Plea on CIC's power to try for perjury, HC seeks case laws
The Delhi High Court today asked a lawyer to provide case laws in support of his plea that the Central Information Commission (CIC) was legally empowered to prosecute an entity or a person for the offence of perjury if false documents are filed before it.
"Provide direct judgments (of HC and the SC) on the issue. Put up for further hearing on September 30," Justice Rajiv Shakdher told Shanmuga Patro, a Delhi-based lawyer who has filed the petition.
During the hearing, Patro cited some judgments and said any panel or tribunal, established under a law, can be treated as a court for initiating prosecution for offences like perjury if somebody files false documents before it.
Earlier, the court had issued a notice to the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) on the plea of Patro that the apex transparency panel be declared as a court in terms of a Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) provision so that it can prosecute a person or an entity for the offence of perjury.
The petition has alleged the CIC refused to initiate prosecution for the offence of perjury against Rajiv Gandhi Foundation (RGF), "its aides and affiliates for filing forged and fabricated documents in evidence" before the panel.
The CIC had, in its December 9, 2011 order, said that "without going into the merits of the case, first of all it becomes necessary for the Commission to see the source of its power to invoke section 340 (perjury) of (CrPC) ...
"Nothing has been stated in the said application (of Patro) about the powers of the Commission but in our opinion, the Commission cannot take cognizance of a complaint under section 340 of CrPC as such explicit powers have not been granted to the Commission under the Right to Information Act, 2005. Hence, the Commission is constrained to decline the requested relief.
Plea on CIC's power to try for perjury, HC seeks case laws
The Delhi High Court today asked a lawyer to provide case laws in support of his plea that the Central Information Commission (CIC) was legally empowered to prosecute an entity or a person for the offence of perjury if false documents are filed before it.
"Provide direct judgments (of HC and the SC) on the issue. Put up for further hearing on September 30," Justice Rajiv Shakdher told Shanmuga Patro, a Delhi-based lawyer who has filed the petition.
During the hearing, Patro cited some judgments and said any panel or tribunal, established under a law, can be treated as a court for initiating prosecution for offences like perjury if somebody files false documents before it.
Earlier, the court had issued a notice to the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) on the plea of Patro that the apex transparency panel be declared as a court in terms of a Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) provision so that it can prosecute a person or an entity for the offence of perjury.
The petition has alleged the CIC refused to initiate prosecution for the offence of perjury against Rajiv Gandhi Foundation (RGF), "its aides and affiliates for filing forged and fabricated documents in evidence" before the panel.
The CIC had, in its December 9, 2011 order, said that "without going into the merits of the case, first of all it becomes necessary for the Commission to see the source of its power to invoke section 340 (perjury) of (CrPC) ...
"Nothing has been stated in the said application (of Patro) about the powers of the Commission but in our opinion, the Commission cannot take cognizance of a complaint under section 340 of CrPC as such explicit powers have not been granted to the Commission under the Right to Information Act, 2005. Hence, the Commission is constrained to decline the requested relief.
Plea on CIC's power to try for perjury, HC seeks case laws
The Delhi High Court today asked a lawyer to provide case laws in support of his plea that the Central Information Commission (CIC) was legally empowered to prosecute an entity or a person for the offence of perjury if false documents are filed before it.
"Provide direct judgments (of HC and the SC) on the issue. Put up for further hearing on September 30," Justice Rajiv Shakdher told Shanmuga Patro, a Delhi-based lawyer who has filed the petition.
During the hearing, Patro cited some judgments and said any panel or tribunal, established under a law, can be treated as a court for initiating prosecution for offences like perjury if somebody files false documents before it.
Earlier, the court had issued a notice to the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) on the plea of Patro that the apex transparency panel be declared as a court in terms of a Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) provision so that it can prosecute a person or an entity for the offence of perjury.
The petition has alleged the CIC refused to initiate prosecution for the offence of perjury against Rajiv Gandhi Foundation (RGF), "its aides and affiliates for filing forged and fabricated documents in evidence" before the panel.
The CIC had, in its December 9, 2011 order, said that "without going into the merits of the case, first of all it becomes necessary for the Commission to see the source of its power to invoke section 340 (perjury) of (CrPC) ...
"Nothing has been stated in the said application (of Patro) about the powers of the Commission but in our opinion, the Commission cannot take cognizance of a complaint under section 340 of CrPC as such explicit powers have not been granted to the Commission under the Right to Information Act, 2005. Hence, the Commission is constrained to decline the requested relief.
Plea on CIC's power to try for perjury, HC seeks case laws
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.