Sealed Cover Jurisprudence
- February 20, 2023
- Posted by: OptimizeIAS Team
- Category: DPN Topics
No Comments
Sealed Cover Jurisprudence
Subject : Polity
Section: Judiciary
Concept :
- Recently, the Union government had proposed to offer suggestions in the sealed cover to the Supreme Court, in reference to the formation of a proposed committee to enquire into the Hindenburg report on the Adani Group.
- The Court, however, refused to accept the suggestions.
Sealed Cover Jurisprudence
- It is a practice used by the Supreme Court and sometimes lower courts, of asking for or accepting information from government agencies in sealed envelopes that can only be accessed by judges.
- There is no law specifying the sealed cover jurisprudence but the SC derives its power from –
- Rule 7 of Order XIII of the Supreme Court Rules and
- Section 123 of the Indian Evidence Act of 1872
- Under Rule 7 of Order XIII (“Copying”) of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013, if the Chief Justice or court directs certain information to be kept under sealed cover or considers it of confidential nature, no party would be allowed access to the contents of such information.
- Under Section 123 of the Indian Evidence Act of 1872, the unpublished official documents about state affairs are given protection and a public servant cannot be forced to disclose such information.
When can the Court ask for Information in a Sealed Cover?
- In broadly two circumstances – when information is connected to an ongoing investigation, and when it involves personal or confidential information.
- The logic is that disclosure of information linked to an ongoing investigation could impede the investigation.
- Also, the disclosure of personal or confidential information could violate an individual’s privacy or result in breach of trust.
Instances of Court using the Seal Cover Jurisprudence:
- Sealed cover jurisprudence has been frequently employed by Courts in the recent past.
- In the case pertaining to the Rafale Fighter Jet deal, a Bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi in 2018, had asked the Centre to submit details related to deal’s decision making and pricing in a sealed cover.
- This was done as the Centre had contended that such details were subject to the Official Secrets Act and Secrecy clauses in the deal.
- In the matters related to the National Register of Citizens (NRC) in Assam, the coordinator of the NRC, Prateek Hajela, was asked by the court to submit period reports in sealed cover, which could neither be accessed by the government nor the petitioners.
- In the 2014 BCCI reforms case, the probe committee of the cricket body had submitted its report to the Supreme Court in a sealed envelope, asking it not to make public the names of nine cricketers who were suspected of a match and spot fixing scam.
Criticism of this Practice:
- Critics of this practice contend that it is not favourable to the principles of transparency and accountability of the Indian justice system.
- It stands in contrast to the idea of an open court, where decisions can be subjected to public scrutiny.
- It is also said to enlarge the scope for arbitrariness in court decisions, as judges are supposed to lay down reasoning for their decision. However, this cannot be done when they are based upon information submitted confidentially.
- It is argued that not providing access to such documents to the accused parties obstructs their passage to a fair trial and adjudication.
- In the 2019 judgment in the case of P Gopalakrishnan V. The State of Kerala, the Supreme Court had said that disclosure of documents to the accused is constitutionally mandated.