NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Tuesday sought to know from the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir if the review orders in connection with internet restriction were published in terms of the judgement in Anuradha Bhasin case.
A bench of Justices B R Gavai and Sanjay Karol said those orders are not supposed to be kept in the cupboard as it rejected a contention by Additional Solicitor General K M Nataraj, appearing for the Union Territory, that the instant plea before the court sought publications of deliberations related to such ban imposed during the time of dilution of Article 370 of the Constitution.
Nataraj said petitioner's plea was for publication of information on deliberations in connection with review orders relating to internet restrictions in UT of Jammu and Kashmir.
On this, the bench told Nataraj, “Forget about deliberations, you publish the orders….are you making a statement that review orders will be published?”
Nataraj said he needs to get instructions in the matter.
“It may not be necessary to publish the deliberations, however the orders passing the review would be required to be published," the bench in its order, after hearing submissions.
The court gave two weeks time to Nataraj to seek instructions.
NGO Foundation of Media Professionals sought a direction for publication of review orders. Advocate Shadan Farasat, representing the petitioner, said the review orders are something to be passed under the statute and therefore they must be published, and the authorities are saying that the special committee report does not have to be published.
"There may be national security reasons, but the review order is a statutory order, and the apex court has clearly said that the main order and review must be published," he said.
Nataraj said all these issues had arisen during the curbs (after the abrogation of the Article 370) and all those prayers have been complied and even contempt had been dismissed.
"Now the petitioner came out with a new prayer," he contended.
Referring to the Anuradha Bhasin judgment of the apex court, the bench said, “the review orders are not to be kept in cupboard”.
The bench also recorded that Farasat said the apex court in the judgment in Anuradha Bhasin case has held that even the review orders are required to be published and the same are not being done in UT of Jammu and Kashmir.
![Himachal Pradesh High Court Grant Bail to a Man Accused of Committing Unnatural Acts with Cow, Said that there is no Criminal History Depicting Pervert Mind [READ ORDER]](/secure/uploads/2020/11/lj_8855_Himachal_Pradesh_High_Court.jpeg)
