DT
PT
Subscribe To Print Edition About The Tribune Code Of Ethics Download App Advertise with us Classifieds
search-icon-img
search-icon-img
Advertisement

Supreme Court dismisses PIL seeking round-the-clock digital monitoring of MPs, MLAs

Satya Prakash New Delhi, March 1 The Supreme Court on Friday dismissed a PIL seeking round-the-clock digital monitoring of lawmakers for better governance, saying it would violate their fundamental right to privacy. “Do you realise what you are arguing? You...
  • fb
  • twitter
  • whatsapp
  • whatsapp
Advertisement

Satya Prakash

Advertisement

New Delhi, March 1

The Supreme Court on Friday dismissed a PIL seeking round-the-clock digital monitoring of lawmakers for better governance, saying it would violate their fundamental right to privacy.

Advertisement

“Do you realise what you are arguing? You want 24/7 monitoring of MPs and MLAs…This is done only for a convicted felon who can flee justice. There is something called right to privacy and we cannot digitally monitor all elected members of Parliament,” a three-judge Bench led by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud told petitioner Surinder Nath Kundra.

The Bench wondered if the top court could put a “chip” in the body of the lawmakers to track their movement round the clock.

Advertisement

“If you argue and we do not agree with you then a cost of Rs 5 lakh will be recovered from you… This is public time and this is not about our ego,” the Bench warned Kundra, resident of Delhi, against wasting precious judicial time.

“We place the petitioner on notice of the fact that this court will impose costs if he pursues the cases. However, we desist from imposing costs with a caution that no such plea should be filed in the future,” it said, rejecting the PIL.

As Kundra said lawmakers were “paid servants of citizens” who have started to behave like rulers, the CJI countered him saying, “You cannot make a common charge against all MPs.”

In all democracies, individuals cannot make laws which have to be enacted through elected lawmakers only, the Bench said.

“Then people will say ok, we do not need judges. We will decide on the streets and kill the offender for theft. Do we want that to happen?” the CJI asked the petitioner and went on to dismiss the PIL.

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
tlbr_img1 Home tlbr_img2 Classifieds tlbr_img3 Premium tlbr_img4 Videos tlbr_img5 E-Paper