Jump to content
News Ticker
  • RTI query reveals banking frauds of ₹ 2.05 Trillion reported in the last 11 years
  • 509 per cent rise in cases under child labour law: Study
  • The Central Information Commission has allowed disclosure of file notings on the mercy petition of a rape and murder convict, rejecting the government's contention that the records cannot be disclosed as these are privileged documents under Article 74(2) of the Constitution.
  • Electoral bonds worth over ₹5,800 crore were bought by donors to fund political parties between March 1, 2018 and May 10, 2019, a Right to Information reply has said.
  • Don't pay 500/- for answer sheet now- Supreme Court says if Answer sheet is asked under RTI, RTI Fees will be governed
colnrkurup

Mr.Shailesh Gandhi's view on Court of Records

Recommended Posts

colnrkurup

Mr.Shailesh Gandhi, during his chat programme answered Mr.Karira that "CIC/SICs are court of records". I doubt correctness of this orders. CIC/SICs are not court of records and they do not even accept orders receprocally.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
karira

Col Kurup,

 

I pointedly asked him this, in view of your earlier post in this forum on this subject and the disussions which resulted.

 

Other 2 questions I asked :

 

1. How muct time do each of the IC's and the CIC at the centre devote to administration/management/IT issues ?

Not Answered

 

2. Has CIC set the "norms" for the discharge of its functions, as mandated in Sec 4(1)(b)(iv) of the RTI Act ?

Answer: No, not as yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
rajub

Is there any coded law to define "court of records"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sandeepbaheti
Is there any coded law to define "court of records"?

Here is a statement from UP Government's website about the Allahabad High Court:

The High Court is a Court of records which means that its work and proceedings serve as perpetual evidence. Its records are of sich high authority that their content cannot be challenged in any lower court. As a court of record, it has also the power to punish persons guilty of its contempt.

Source: Profile of Uttar Pradesh

 

If we go by this definition, CIC is definitely not a court of records.

 

Also, Articles 129 and 215 of the Constitution of India declare the Supreme Court and High Courts to be Court of Records. Article 129 states:

129. Supreme Court to be a court of record.—The Supreme Court shall be a court of record and shall have all the powers of such a court including the power to punish for contempt of itself.

Article 215 has similar stipulation about every High Court.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sandeepbaheti

Another exctract from http://karnatakajudiciary.kar.nic.in/ilr-jud/may_1_2003.pdf :

The Court of records envelopes all

such powers whose acts and proceedings are to be enrolled in a

perpetual, memorial and testimony. A Court which is itself

competent to determine the scope of its jurisdiction. The High

Court, as a Court of record, has a duty to itself to keep also its

records correctly and in accordance with law. Hence if any

apparent error is noticed by the High Court in respect of any

orders passed by it, the High Court has not only power but a

duty to correct it. The High Court’s power in that regard is plenary

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
colnrkurup

The correct defenition of Court of records is not readily traceable. However, the Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia say that :

 

" In common law jurisdictions, a court of record is a judicial tribunal having attributes and exercising functions independently of the person of the magistrate designated generally to hold it, and proceeding according to the course of common law, its acts and proceedings being enrolled for a perpetual memorial.[1] Judgments of a trial court of record are normally subject to appellate review. In many jurisdictions, all courts are courts of record. In many jurisdictions, courts that have the power to fine or imprison must be courts of record. In almost all jurisdictions, a court of record will have a court clerk whose primary duty is to maintain the permanent records. Traditionally, a court of record was required to have its own unique seal, which was used to authenticate its judgments and copies of its records "

 

Basically orders of court of records has certain sanctity and subjected toscrutiny by competent persons before included. Such courts are not entrusted in the hands of people who are not competent enough to issue such orders

 

As I had expressed in another forum, I wish Mr.Shailesh Gandhi correct his statement at the earliest lest someone consider it as gospel truth and open their mouth before the FAAs,, various Courts and Tribunal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
chanda_s

i was speaking on this subject to one of friends who is into law. he was citing examples in european judicial systems where courts evolved over period of time into court of records though originally, they were not specifically mandated to be so and in the absence of any written constitution.

 

i see no reason why the present cic should not evolve into a court of records over a period of time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
colnrkurup

Mr.Chadha,

Forget it. Do you know that every orders of court of records will be law and as such can be quotted as precedence and authority. Its disobedience apart from other facts amount to contempt of court. Do you think the present Information Commissioners of CIC and SICs are capable of turning out orders that can sustain ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
chanda_s

i'm too junior and dont consider myself knowledgeable enough to comment on the competence of the information commissioners. neither have i dealt with them too much. my limited experiences with the ICs have been a great learning experience for me and frankly i admit i was impressed with the seriousness and quickness shown in disposing off cases.

 

in any case i was nt referring to any particular IC or present state of affairs. that not withstanding, i was trying to convey that if as citizens and users we show greater maturity and let the process of evolution continue, we can still say "why not"? afterall the british from whom we inherited all laws, at least most of them, still dont have a written constitution and their constitution is still evolving. evolution is part of governance, administration, jurisprudence and every other aspect of life. lot of things initially start off as convention and gradually become statute, written or unwritten.

 

all said and done, we only have a commission and not an information tribunal. as a commission, perhaps, by definition, powers of court can be exercised only by express sanction of a statute. otherwise tomorrow some one may say why should FAA also not be a court of records.

 

may be in the coming days we could have a tribunal which would be a court of records. may be a better idea if the second appeal directly goes to information tribunal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jps50

Little out of line, suppose I enclose copy of earlier judgement of a High Court which is very relevant to my RTI appln and according to which I should get the info. PIO refuses and FAA supports PIO. Will this amount to contempt of High Court?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sandeepbaheti

As per my understanding, in this case the PIO will be guilty of contempt of court. The FAA is a separate individual from PIO and cannot ratify his crime.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
taurus

I dont think there will be any contempt in this case. Contempt comes only when the order of the court is not honoured or disobeyed. In the example cited by you the High Court has passed an order in a particular case. It is based on the facts and circumstances of that particular case. If, in that particular case it is not honored or disobeyed, then there will be contempt. There cannot be a contempt if that order is not followed in a different case which one may consider to be 'similar'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
revribhav

Yes,I think the person who alleges that PIO has not followed the order of high court referred by him has to file separate case in high court to seek hustice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
colnrkurup

Extract of e-mail on the subject received from Mr.Shailesh Gandhi this morning is given below:

 

" I agree, it was mistake on my part to have stated that "CIC and SICs are Courts of Records etc., "

Shailesh Gandhi.

 

The view that CIC and SICs are not courts of records therefore stands as stated in my earlier posts in this form.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
nikkapoor88
Is there any coded law to define "court of records"?

 

you will not find proper definition anywhere easily because their whole deception will be blown away.

 

Ask any lawyer and he will explain that a court of record is a court that keeps a record of the proceedings and has the power to fine or imprison for contempt. That's only half the story. The rest of the story is that it is a court that proceeds according to the common law (no statutes), and the tribunal (the one doing the judging) is independent of the magistrate (the judge). Notice that in a court of record the judge is not allowed to do any judging; judging is reserved to the tribunal. In a court of record there are only two entities that are true tribunals: the sovereign of the court (the plaintiff), and the jury (if present). Several times.

This writer concludes, from the definitions below, that a

court of record is a court which must meet the following

criteria:

 

1. generally has a seal

2. power to fine or imprison for contempt

3. keeps a record of the proceedings

4. proceeding according to the common law (not statutes or codes)

5. the tribunal is independent of the magistrate (judge)

 

Note that a judge is a magistrate and is not the tribunal.

The tribunal is either the sovereign himself, or a fully

empowered jury (not paid by the government)

 

you have the power to fine judges for contempt of court when they refused to obey the law of the court.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
colnrkurup

Nice to see such old post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Announcements

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use & Privacy Policy