IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
AT NEW DELHI
ORIGINAL AND SUPERVISORY
JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION (C) NO. / 2015
Anjan Sinha …
Petitioner
Versus
Union of India
& Ors. …
Respondents
SYNOPSIS
The present issues on which the Petitioner seeks adjudication
at this Hon'ble High Court are of utmost significance and have great consequences.
For various reasons the petitioner is approaching this Hon’ble Court for making
the transparency and accountability of the judiciary into an actuality. The
video recording of the court proceedings will surely help our justice delivery
system to function more efficiently, diligently and transparently. The video
recording of the court proceedings will convert our court rooms actually and
factually open, so that more and more tax-payers may be present at trials,
hearings and similar routine matters, without being present into the courtroom
physically. Nowadays we are using modern technologies, even from cricket to
Parliament; we should not deprive our judiciary from taking the benefits of
changing times and technologies. Hence the present Writ Petition.
Points to be urged
1) Is there any
law present in our country, which prohibits video recording of the court
proceedings?
2) Isn’t it my
right being a tax-payer as well as a litigant, to have recording of every court
proceeding, when Article 215 of the Indian constitution says that all High
Courts are “Courts of Record”?
3) Doesn’t
‘video recording’ reduce the security risks of the court rooms, by reducing the
physical presence of General Public in large, in the court rooms?
4) Can’t we make
the Courtroom journalism more easy, most coverable and enrich our knowledge in
legal system by having ‘video recording’ facilities of court processes?
5) Can’t we
offer more public participation in judiciary by creating an opportunity to
witness the courtroom process ‘live’ as well as ‘online’?
6) Aren’t we
missing our opportunities to train and enhance the knowledge and skill of our
future generation lawyers, by not giving them an opportunity to follow the
court proceeding directly and visually?
7) Shouldn’t we
publicize the respect and authenticity of our Judiciary more efficiently by
doing ‘video recording of court proceedings’?
C)
Acts referred:-
1)
Constitution of India;
2)
Supreme Court Rules and High Court Rules
3)
Code of Civil Procedure,1908
4) Criminal Procedure Code,1973
5) Indian Evidence Act, 1872
6)
Any other Act.
Authorities
to be cited:
At the time of arguments.
Date : th September, 2015.
Place
: New Delhi
Advocates for the Petitioner
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
ORIGINAL AND SUPERVISORY
JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION (C) NO. /2015
Anjan
Sinha
L-30/D,
Saket,
New
Delhi – 110001 …
Petitioner
Versus
1.
Union of India
Through its Secretary,
Department
of Law and Justice
Ministry of Law and
Justice,
4th Floor, A-Wing, Shastri
Bhawan,
New Delhi-110 001.
2.
The Attorney General for
India
Office
of the Attorney General,
Supreme
Court Compound,
New
Delhi.
3.
T he Registrar, High Court of
Delhi,
4.
Advocate General, State of Delhi
5.
The Secretary,
Ministry of
Justice,
Government of
India,
Ministry of Law and
Justice,
4th Floor, A-Wing, Shastri
Bhawan,
New Delhi-110 001.
6.
The Bar Council of India
7.
The Bar Council of Delhi
8.
The Chairman,
Law Commission of India,
Law Commission of India,
14th Floor, Hindustan Times House
Kasturba Gandhi Marg,
New
Delhi – 110 001.
9.
The Supreme Court Advocates
on Record Association
Supreme Court Campus,
New Delhi-110 001
10.
The Supreme Court Advocates’
Association
Supreme
Court Campus,
New
Delhi-110 001
11.
The Advocate’s Association,
High Court of Delhi. …Respondents
WRIT
PETITION(C) UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR GROSS VIOLATION
OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS RESULTING BY VIOLATING THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL RIGHTS.
TO
THE
HONOURABLE CHIEF JUSTICE
AND HIS/HER
OTHER COMPANION HONOURABLE JUDGES
OF THIS
HONOURABLE Court
THE HUMBLE PETITION OF THE PETITIONER ABOVENAMED
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHEWETH
1. The petitioner is a citizen of India. and is
approaching this court as a lawyer, where he had to face the court on behalf of
many litigants. The respondents are the authorities/organs, legal as well as
administrative, whereby they are called upon to respond to a call to make a
small decision, by which there will be revolution, literally in the field of
justice delivery in India.
2. Further,
the instant Writ Petition involves construction, nay, the very interpretation
of the provisions of the Constitution
of India; Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Criminal Procedure Code,1973, Indian
Evidence Act, 1872, Supreme Court and
High Court Rules and, therefore, the
views of the State and Registrar are absolutely relevant for a proper and just
disposal of the instant proceeding. What
is stated of the State is equally applicable to the Union of India, also.
Order 1
Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure provides as follows:-
“All
persons may be joined in one suit as plaintiffs where—
(a)
any right to relief in respect of, or arising out of, the same act or
transaction or series of acts or transactions is alleged to exist in such
persons, whether jointly, severally or in the alternative; and
(b)
if such persons brought separate suits, any common question of law or fact
would arise.”
3.
The Attorney General of India is
made a party Respondent since interpretation, nay, construction of the
Constitution of India, Civil Procedure Code, Code of Criminal Procedure, The
Indian Evidence Act, are involved.
Further, Order XXVIIA CPC requires that if a suit involves determination
of a substantial question of laws as to interpretation of the Constitution or
as to the validity of any statutory instrument, the Court shall not proceed to
determine that question until after notice has been given to the Attorney
General for India if the question of law concerns the Central Government and to
the Advocate-General of the State if the question of law concerns a State Government.
4.
It
is an era of information and especially driven by the technology. The justice
delivery system and the judiciary, which is the seat of justice, equity and
good conscious, cannot turn a blind eye or anemic to the changes in the social
and technical arena. As a matter of fact, nothing is static and everything is
exposed to change except the change itself. Rather, except change everything
changes. Hence the petitioner expect and
foresee changes in the judiciary as well.
5.
Article
215 of the Constitution of India states that
“215. Every High 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.”
Even though
the high courts are the court of record, it is maintained in the form of type
writing and other conventional methods. There is no Rule, Act or else the
provisions of the Constitution which prevents the recording of the court
proceedings in digital format by way of audio-video recording. Hence the
petitioner herein most humbly prays that the proceedings of the court may
please be recorded for making it more responsive and accountable. It will
surely be having many advantages in the fore run to make our judiciary more
transparent and aid it in the speedy dispensing of justice.
6.
The public opinion as the judiciary gathers is very
important in keeping the sanctity of the judiciary. The seat of justice is of
sacrosanct importance and can be aided in keeping such a high esteem before the
public at large by recording its own proceedings. The credibility of the
institution will only increase and reach to its zenith by adopting such a
dynamic course And the credibility of the institution is more important than
the individual opinions and fallacies. There may be many individual associated
with the very institution at various capacities as the hon’ble lordships and
surely as the advocates also. The litigant community is the one which is most
affected by any of the decision of the said community. But at any stretch of
imagination the litigants cannot take part in the proceedings and is only a
mute spectator to the said proceedings and at times even not able to be a
spectator to such proceedings. But for all theoretical purposes, the judicial
proceedings are the public affairs and the public at large are also entitled to
witness the proceedings, until unless it is decided to be an in camera
proceedings. Whereas due to security and other reasons, the entry in to this
High Court campus is virtually impossible to the parties to the
suits/proceedings, and the question of the general public witnessing the said
proceedings, even when the same is a public proceeding is beyond imagination.
The video recording and telecasting can increase the public confidence in the
judicial system and can cause the reputation of the courts to reach new
heights.
7.
Looking at the legislature, both houses of
Parliament of India, which is another pillar of democracy, the proceedings are
recorded and even telecasted all over India. Even most of the legislative assemblies are allowing
recording of its proceedings and even telecasting the same within the territory
of its respective territorial areas.
8.
Article
215 of the Indian Constitution, which says that all High Courts are
"Courts of Record". Still as per present days’ practice there is no
"record" of what is argued in Indian "Courts of Record". And
the end sufferers of this practice are the litigants i.e. the taxpayers of our
country.
9.
The very
legislative body that frames and passes law in India (i.e. the Lok Sabha, which
is the 'House of the People') have been televising their own Parliamentary
proceedings for almost a decade now. In other words, the body that has framed
the Contempt of Courts Act for the Courts does not deem it contemptuous if its
own proceedings are known to the public, and they are held accountable for
their conduct. So there is no reason to be reluctant to allow the camera into
court-rooms, especially when this would provide incontrovertible-evidence of
what goes on inside.
10.
Country after country has found that entry of the video camera into the
courtroom renders transparency into what is most certainly an opaque process
even in the eyes of the direct participants i.e. the lawyers/litigants who are
party to any particular case. Even Nigeria, Zambia and Sierra Leone have
started recording of their court's proceedings.
11.
Further looking to various courts proceedings in the
democracies, world over, the recording of court proceedings are taking effect
in many of the nations and the remaining are on its way to adopt such a dynamic
concept. The Petitioner surely realizes that the Government and the judiciary
are committed to open justice. Open justice is a long-standing and fundamental
principle of our legal system. Justice must be done and must be seen to be done
if it is to command public confidence. It is not enough that our Courts are
open as a matter of general principle: it has to be a reality. This argument
has been made for many years; in 1924, Viscount Hewart, then Lord Chief
Justice, stated that “Justice should not only be done, but should manifestly
and undoubtedly be seen to be done.”
12.
The petitioner submits that the audio and
video recording would not involve substantial cost and there is no involvement
of any kind of infrastructural improvement and it should be done for the sake
of transparency. It is his further submission that the said audio and video
recording would show an undeniable and objective record of what transpired in
Court. It is propounded by the petitioner that it would hasten the dispensation
of justice and fulfil the hopes of the litigants. It is highlighted that in a
progressive and civilized society, audio and video recording would add more
transparency to the justice dispensation system as well as cut down delays in disposal of cases.
13.
The United Kingdom is the nation from where we have
adopted the parliamentary democracy, and so the law followed by us is very much
English law. the same nation has turned a green signal to the recording. The
Supreme Court proceedings are recorded and telecasted and further it is
available in the internet for the general public to watch in any later real
time.
14.
It is well understood that
in a country like us in which majority of the population are not professionally
qualified or many of them even illiterates, allowing people to see and hear
judges’ decisions will increase their understanding of the court without
undermining the proper administration of justice. Given the complexity of legal
issues in judicial proceedings, we believe that allowing advocates’ arguments
to be filmed in addition to judgments would be more likely to improve public
understanding than judgments alone. The purpose is to ensure that there are
proper and accurate court records so that the lis/dispute is properly
addressed. Also the conduct of various stakeholders, including that of persons
seeking and obtaining adjournments, for the asking, is recorded. Perjury and
contempt that are routine will get addressed. And there will be increased
confidence in the system. Introduction of video-recording would be a big step
towards transparency, equality and realisation of quick justice.
15.
In United States of
America, Fourteen federal trial courts are taking part in the federal
Judiciary's digital video pilot, which started July 18, 2011, and will evaluate
the effect of cameras in courtrooms. All 14 courts volunteered to participate
in the three-year experiment, which has been extended to run through July 18,
2015. More information, including a list of the 14 participating courts, is
available on the Overview of Pilot web page.
16.
In Australia, The High
Court (The Apex Court there) has been considering how to improve public access
to its hearings. All hearings of the
Court are open to the public. The Court also provides online access to a wide
range of case-specific information. The
Court has now decided to take the further step of publishing on its website
audio-visual recordings of Full Court hearings heard in Canberra.
17.
Many a times the court
proceedings are vitiated by some malicious parties to the issue and for their
personal advantage, which may even be fraudulent, assign aspirations upon the
bench to unjustly interfere with the justice delivery system and videography of
court proceedings can deter such
frivolous allegations against judges and, if broadcast, reduce crowding on
court premises, whereby the space constraint of almost all the courts across
the nation can be addressed very effectively. As the density of population
increases, with increased number of litigation, the Government is finding it
difficult to increase the infrastructure and the floor areas of buildings where
the courts are located. The video recording and even broadcasting the same can
be an effective remedy for such a constraint and limitation.
18.
The supreme court of Arizona has also allowed
electronic recording of the proceedings.
19.
The Canadian courts have also adopted to the methods
of video recording of its proceedings. It has issued a guideline namely, “Media Audio and Video Recordings in the
Courtroom Guidelines”.
20.
While a minor issue in the long-term, court
reporter job loss may be an important early challenge to transitioning to court
automation. Job loss is more likely to occur in countries that have a long
established court personnel staff rather than in developing countries. Only
when a country has had a highly functioning court system that is well staffed
with many highly trained court reporters does loss of court reporter jobs
become an issue. Where applicable, this issue should be addressed at the
transition planning stage, and provisions should be made to apprise the court
reporters and work alongside them to either integrate their skills into the new
recording system or to find other Employment. In Kazakhstan, Bulgaria, Bosnia
and Herzegovina, and in various states, transitioning from older court
recording methods to high tech systems has yielded positive results. Some of
the positive results include a) time saved, b) increase in transparency and accuracy,
c) improved courtroom processes, d) increase trust in the judiciary, e) more efficient
use of the appeals process, f) decreased running cost of present record
maintenance system, g) increase the public confidence in the judiciary, h) will
allow the law students, interns and first generation advocates to have better
opportunity to understand the law and court practice, i) all those who are in
legal fraternity will be aided to improve their skill levels.
21.
New court recording technologies create
verbatim records of the trial. Some recording techniques create audio-visual
recordings that are automatically streamed into a written record in real time,
as the hearings unfold. Generally speaking, courts are no longer required to
wait for judges to dictate summaries or a court reporter to finalize the
written record. Though in some countries a written transcript is produced and
sometimes still required for the case file, the verbatim record is easily and
immediately accessible after the trial and copies can be requested, sent,
filed, and searched in preparation of appeals.
22.
Audio-visual and other high tech court
recording machines have led to greater transparency because they provide a
highly accurate, complete record of court hearings. Moreover, the trial court
record may also be more easily transcribed, which facilitates review by the
appeals court judges and parties. Most often, the record produced by the recording
machines is an unedited, verbatim record that can be reviewed in its original form,
in full or in part, by both judges and parties upon request. Accurate records improve
courtroom processes because all parties in a suit, as well as judges, know that
their behavior is on the record.
23.
Audio-visual and real time recordings protect
the judicial process by serving as a monitoring device to hold all parties
accountable for the actual proceedings in court. By compiling and providing a
complete and accurate picture of the judicial process and protocols, real time
recordings educate citizens on their rights and duties and consequently improve
both judge and party performances in the courtroom. Given that a real time
recording can be reviewed in detail by the judge, parties are more likely to
give clear and accurate statements. Judicial behavior is also monitored by real
time recordings and these documents, and increases the clarity of any grounds
for appeal. Consequently, it provides an added incentive to accurately use the
relevant protocols and professionalism in rendering judgment and presenting
cases. Lack of trained court reporters and cost and transcript production time
no longer slow down the judicial process.
24.
High tech recording systems lead to more
efficient use of time, an increase in transparency and accuracy, and improved
courtroom processes. Together, these benefits raise the public’s trust in the
judiciary system. For example, real time recordings permit the judiciary to
offer improved services to the public by providing low cost recorded versions
of hearings in a timely manner (after the initial investment, naturally). Moreover,
these recordings are often more accurate than transcripts which differ in quality
and precision. In sum, this enhanced “customer service” places the judiciary in
a more positive, trustworthy light.
25.
When cases that have been recorded using the
automated technology are appealed, the appeals process is more efficient as the
appeals courts can easily access, and rely upon, a full accurate trial court
record. As result of the cumulative effect of the positive results of the
automated recording systems, the appeals process becomes more efficient.
Ultimately, given the increase in transparency and accountability, fewer cases need
to be appealed. According to the USAID report on the Kazakhstan project,
nonrecorded cases are nearly three times more likely to be appealed than
recorded cases.
26.
Transitioning from manual documentation to
automated recording systems is an intensive process that requires effective
change management strategies. Any successful change management strategy relies
on a strong political and financial will power. This commitment must in turn be
converted to careful planning and goal setting, as well as detailed
implementation and training guides. Moreover, the efficacy of the measures should
be monitored and evaluated throughout the transition process.
27.
In developing a transition plan from an old recording
system to a more high tech one, the jurisdiction must consider the current scope
of record making services, the needs, and the possibilities under the new
record making system. The jurisdiction must then select between different court
reporting systems depending on the scope of the services they wish to offer. Many
different categories of court record making systems exist, including the old fashioned
hand written court reports, audio or video cassette recording, pen-based stenographic
reporting techniques, and verbatim technologies such as stenography and digital
video and audio recording. Depending on the needs and the means, the jurisdiction
can chose a more or less sophisticated and costly method. Some of the most cutting
edge technologies include Computer-aided transcription (CAT) methods. CAT uses
a computer steno machine equipped with magnetic storage that must be operated by
a court stenographer. Real-time reporting instantly converts the words spoken
in the courtroom into computerized text.
28.
Delineating the court reporting transition
plan and setting up the goals necessitates skilled communication among many
parties. Court “customers” include the public, legislators, parties before the
court, attorneys and judges at both trial and appellate levels, clerks, court
administrators, interpreters, and others. It is important to obtain input from
all customers in order to better shape changes and improvements to the system.
Gathering customer/ client satisfaction feedback is key in shaping a better record
production system since customers, for example, parties before the court, request
and use the record to build cases and move on through the appeals process. A good
record can facilitate the appeals process, but a bad record can lead to a waste
of time, frustration, and a general distrust of the judicial system.
29.
A transition plan to move towards cutting
edge court recording methods is incomplete without a retention plan for skilled
personnel, already familiar with the old court reporting system. Personnel who
can write in real time are valuable the court for their captioning skills.
Thus, jurisdictions should plan to invite court reporters who can write in real
time, as well as other skilled network engineers, and computer programmers to
join the new court recording system team before dispensing of their services.
In Maryland, the jurisdiction offered to train the former court reporters to
use the new recording system before dismissing
them from their position. Courts can provide better incentives for retaining
skilled workers through improved compensation packages and better training
methods to help court reporters convert to strong court recorder positions in
an automated environment.
30.
After delineating a clear transition plan and
concrete goals, jurisdictions must develop a detailed Operation Procedure
Manual to guide and train the equipment operators, the judges and all involved
in recording, storing and distributing the recorded hearings. Last but not
least, any jurisdiction must monitor and evaluate the new system’s performance.
A strong change management strategy should identify evaluation criteria and
should implement testing and evaluation measures throughout the transition and
on through the each phase of the new recording system’s implementation. Such
testing will permit constructive feedback to all stakeholders and will
facilitate any changes needed to improve the new system.
31.
Automated court recordings are increasingly
employed on a global scale, including in developing and developed countries.
The benefits of verbatim court records can be significant, and over rides cost, infrastructure, and legal
traditions as major factors to consider in determining whether automated court
recording as an appropriate technology for a particular jurisdiction.
32.
If due to any reasons, it
is not possible for the courts to record its proceedings officially, the
petitioner alternatively is seeking a declaration that the parties to the
litigations are entitled to non-intrusively cause video recording of judicial
proceedings in those cases wherein they themselves
are parties. They should be allowed to
do so either by themselves or through an Advocate-on-record. The petitioner
further prays that a Writ of Prohibition should be issued against respondents
no. 2 i.e. the Registrar of this Court and Registrars of other courts within
the jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court, not to interfere with the right of the litigants
to do non-intrusive video recording. It’s possible that they can use these recordings
later in appellate proceedings to minimise the arguments and areas of conflicts
and thus saving the precious time of the courts, which are already flooded by
litigations.
33.
The High Court at Calcutta
has also, though for once, allowed the recording of the proceeding with the
permission of concerned counsels, in both CP No. 90 of 1983 and CP No. 33 of 1988.
Justice Aniruddha Bose took this landmark decision on 15th July,
2015, which we need to push further to make our judiciary most trustworthy to
the eyes of the citizens of this country.
34.
Further, many a times the pleadings
are not recorded properly and sometimes with the core values are mutated in
recording the same. The comments of the judges are not having any values until
unless it is recorded, and there are greater dangers of misinterpreting such
observations, as there are no proper records of the said proceedings. The
commitments/ assurances given by the advocates/pleaders shall have a binding
effect only if the same are properly recorded. In case of conflicts or difference
of opinions, the said pleadings recorded will be of usefulness. Even the
gestures of the bench or the counsel will serve a long lasting decisive impact
upon the proceedings. The recordings will make sure that such gestures are part
of proceedings. The clients will be assured that the advocates are presenting
their cased diligently. There is no cause to deny the invasion of modern
technology and cost is not prohibitive. Apart from the fear of both the bar and
bench of recording and exposing their ignorance or imprudence, even though
inadvertently, there is no other reason to oppose this prayer. Justice delivery
system will be strengthened. The professionals will be made more accountable.
There will be transparency in the judicial mechanism. Further it will be
restoring the lost faith of the public at large in the judiciary by speeding up
the process. And surely it will be a leading light to the world at large.
35.
The present scenario has
emerged a situation by which many a conflicts are not brought to the doorsteps
of courts at all, but settled through alternative mechanisms, whereby the
authorities and even existence of judiciary becomes a matter of question. This
is the result of loss of faith to the public in the justice delivery system.
36.
In
view of what is stated hereinabove, it is submitted that this Hon'ble Court is
invested with jurisdiction to entertain the instant Petition and to issue
appropriate writs, order or direction, including declarations as prayed for. Hence, the instant Writ Petition under Article 226 and 227 of
the Constitution on the following, amongst other, grounds:-
GROUNDS
Further
Grounds in support of the reliefs sought for are fairly elaborated in the
statement of facts above and hence are not repeated. The Petitioner respectfully submits that
paragraphs 3 to 35 hereinabove may be read and treated as the grounds in
support of the instant Writ Petition.
37.
Petitioner craves leave of this Hon’ble
Court to add to, alter, amend and/or modify any of the aforesaid grounds as and
when required.
38.
The Petitioner states that
requisite Court-fee of Rs. 250/- as per
Rules has been paid.
39.
The Petitioner states that there
is no period of limitation for preferring this Petition and hence the same is
within limitation.
40.
The Petitioner states that the
Petitioner has no other efficacious alternative remedy than to prefer the
instant Writ Petition.
41.
The Petitioner states that the
cause of action has arisen in Delhi and hence this Hon’ble High Court has
jurisdiction to entertain this Petition.
Further the principle reliefs sought for in the instant petition is in
the nature of declaration, both positive and negative, in respect of which the
concept of cause of action is even alien.
Therefore, this Hon'ble High Court is competent, nay, duty bound to
embark upon the inquiry on the legal queations which are sought to be
adjudicated at its hands and, in case the petitioner succeeds to prove its
case, to grant the writs sought for.
42. The
instant Writ Petition is not barred by the doctrine of estoppel and Res judicata
THE
PETITIONER, THEREFORE, PRAY THAT THIS Hon'ble Court BE GRACIOUSLY PLEASED TO:
(a)
declare that the right to know and
the fairness and objectivity in judicial proceedings are well recognized to
be an integral part of the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution
of India, so too, the concept of transparency, which is the quintessence of the
equality clause of Article 14, may even of Article 19 of the Constitution,
video recording of the proceedings of
this Hon’ble Court and of all Courts and Tribunals subordinate to it, may as a
principle of law, all Courts and Tribunals in this Country including the
Supreme Court be essential, and to grand such consequential and executory
remedies, prayed for separately infra;
(b)
Issue a writ of mandamus or any
other appropriate writ, order or direction to the respondents herein to take
adequate steps and measures to introduce the system of video recording the
proceedings of the Hon’blr Supreme Court of India, Hon’ble High Court of Delhi
and all the subordinate courts and
tribunals within India as an authentic record of the proceedings, allow the
copies of the said records to be issued to the public on demand paying of the
costs, allow the court proceedings to be telecasted by the media, and also
allow the same proceedings to be uploaded to the internet; and if the said
prayer is not admissible and maintainable for whatever reason as this Hon’ble Court may find proper,
in the alternative without
prejudice to the above, to
allow the litigants to litigation to video and audio recording the court
proceedings in which they are parties at their own cost and effort and issue
directions to the respondents not to interfere in any way to such non intrusive
efforts, declaring that there is no illegality or misdemeanor in such recording;
(c)
pass any such further and other
orders as the nature and circumstances of the case may warrant.
(R.P.Luthra)
Advocate for the Petitioner Petitioner
V
E R I F I C A T I ON
I,
Anjan Sinha,
Aged about 39 yrs, the Petitioner above named Adult, Indian, residing at L-30/D,
Saket, New Delhi - 110017, do hereby solemnly declare that
what is stated in paragraphs 1 to ___ of the foregoing Petition are true to my
own knowledge and what is stated in paragraphs ___ to ___ are stated on information and belief and I
believe the same to be true.
Solemnly
declared at Delhi ]
this
____thday of September, 2015. ] Deponent
Advocate
for the Petitioner
(R.P.Luthra)
Advocates for the
Petitioner
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
ORIGINAL
AND SUPERVISORY JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)
NO. OF 2015
Anjan Sinha … Petitioner
Versus
Union of India & Ors. … Respondents
A
F F I D A V I T
I, Anjan
Sinha, Aged about 39 yrs, the Petitioner above named Adult, Indian, r/o L-30/D,
New Delhi – 110017, do hereby solemnly affirm and state as under:-
1. I am the Petitioner in the above Writ
Petiton. I know the facts of the case and are competent swear this
affidavit.
2. That
the above Writ Petition filed under Articles 226 of the Constitution of India.
I am fully acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case and hence,
am competent to swear this Affidavit.
3. That,
the accompanying Writ Petition has been drafted by my Counsel on my
instructions. I have read and understood the contents of the same which are
true and correct to my knowledge and belief.
No fact of it is false and nothing material has been concealed
therefrom.
4. That,
the Exhibits to the Writ Petition are true and correct copies of their
respective originals.
Solemnly affirmed at Delhi ]
on this ___ day of September, 2015 ]
Petitioner
(R.P.Luthra)
Advocates for the Petitioner
