)
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Wednesday will hear Facebook India vice-president Ajit Mohan’s petition challenging a Delhi assembly panel’s summons to him to depose before it on the Delhi riots. The petitioner said it appeared to be a pre-meditated exercise as the panel chief had already made up mind about Facebook’s complicity in the Delhi riots.
Mohan’s petition, which is listed for hearing before a three-judge bench headed by Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul on Wednesday, said, “There is no law that empowers a state legislature, including a committee formed by that legislature, to take coercive action against any person unless the person obstructs or impedes its legislative functions. The rights and liberties of persons are protected by fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution, and coercive action cannot be taken against any citizen unless that action has been authorised by law.”
The petitioner said on August 31, even before issuance of the summons to him, committee chairman Raghav Chadha held a press conference announcing that “Facebook should be treated as a co-accused” in the Delhi riots and that there was a “premeditated conspiracy between Facebook, rioters and anti-social elements”.
Shortly thereafter, the committee issued the first summons, which ordered the petitioner to appear on September 15 as a witness and render assistance to the committee for a “determination of the veracity of allegations levelled against Facebook in the complaints and depositions made before the committee”.
The petitioner, in a communication on September 13, questioned the panel’s authority to summon him as the issue was squarely within the domain of the Union government. On September 18, the committee issued fresh summons, directing the petitioner to appear before the committee on September 23. The second summons stated that non-compliance “will be treated as breach of privilege of the committee and necessary action, as deemed fit, shall be taken against you”, the petitioner said.
Mohan’s petition, which is listed for hearing before a three-judge bench headed by Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul on Wednesday, said, “There is no law that empowers a state legislature, including a committee formed by that legislature, to take coercive action against any person unless the person obstructs or impedes its legislative functions. The rights and liberties of persons are protected by fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution, and coercive action cannot be taken against any citizen unless that action has been authorised by law.”
The petitioner said on August 31, even before issuance of the summons to him, committee chairman Raghav Chadha held a press conference announcing that “Facebook should be treated as a co-accused” in the Delhi riots and that there was a “premeditated conspiracy between Facebook, rioters and anti-social elements”.
Shortly thereafter, the committee issued the first summons, which ordered the petitioner to appear on September 15 as a witness and render assistance to the committee for a “determination of the veracity of allegations levelled against Facebook in the complaints and depositions made before the committee”.
The petitioner, in a communication on September 13, questioned the panel’s authority to summon him as the issue was squarely within the domain of the Union government. On September 18, the committee issued fresh summons, directing the petitioner to appear before the committee on September 23. The second summons stated that non-compliance “will be treated as breach of privilege of the committee and necessary action, as deemed fit, shall be taken against you”, the petitioner said.
More News
PM Modi Rakes Up Godhra Train Arson In Bihar Rally, Says Lalu Shielded Culprits Under Madam Sonias Rule
AI cuts baggage limit to 15kg in lowest-fare bracket | India News – Times of India
Paytm Announces Leadership Change To Double Down On Financial Services