directions could be issued by the Court to subserve public interest in creating an informed citizenry
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 10044 OF 2010
CENTRAL PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER,
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA ….. APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
SUBHASH CHANDRA AGARWAL ….. RESPONDENT(S)
W I T H
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 10045 OF 2010
A N D
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 2683 OF 2010
J U D G M E N T
SANJIV KHANNA, J.
71. In Union of India v. Association for Democratic Reforms and
Another48 recognising the voters’ right to know the antecedents of
the candidates and the right to information which stems from
Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution, it was held that directions could
48 (2002) 5 SCC 294
Civil Appeal No. 10044 of 2010 & Ors. Page 84 of 108
be issued by the Court to subserve public interest in creating an
informed citizenry, observing:
“46. […] The right to get information in democracy is
recognised all throughout and it is natural right flowing
from the concept of democracy. At this stage, we would
refer to Article 19(1) and (2) of the International
Covenant of Civil and Political Rights which is as
under:
(1) Everyone shall have the right to hold opinions
without interference.
(2) Everyone shall have the right to freedom of
expression; this right shall include freedom to seek,
receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds,
regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in
print, in the form of art, or through any other media of
his choice.
6. Cumulative reading of plethora of decisions of this
Court as referred to, it is clear that if the field meant for
legislature and executive is left unoccupied detrimental
to the public interest, this Court would have ample
jurisdiction under Article 32 read with Article 141 and
142 of the Constitution to issue necessary directions to
the Executive to subserve public interest.”
Clearly, the larger public interest in having an informed
electorate, fair elections and creating a dialectical democracy had
outweighed and compelled this Court to issue the directions
notwithstanding disclosure of information relating to the personal
assets, educational qualifications and antecedents including
previous involvement in a criminal case of the contesting
candidate