Note4Students

From UPSC perspective, the following things are important :

Prelims level: NA

Mains level: Sealed Cover Jurisprudence

seal

The Supreme Court has suggested a way out of routinely filing documents in sealed covers, especially in cases touching on national security.

What did the apex Court say?

The court said the government could redact the sensitive portions and show the rest to the petitioners.
This would address both the state’s concerns about “national security” and the “right to know” of petitioners.

What is 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.
A specific law does not define the doctrine of sealed cover.
The Supreme Court derives its power to use it from Rule 7 of order XIII of the Supreme Court Rules and Section 123 of the Indian Evidence Act of 1872.

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.
There is an exception to this if the Chief Justice himself orders that the opposite party be allowed to access it.
It also mentions that information can be kept confidential if its publication is not considered to be in the interest of the public.
As for the Evidence Act, official unpublished documents relating to state affairs are protected and a public officer cannot be compelled to disclose such documents.

Other instances where information may be sought in secrecy or confidence is when its publication:

Sealed cover jurisprudence has been frequently employed by courts in the recent past.

(1) Rafale Deal

In the case pertaining to the controversial Rafale fighter jet deal, a Bench headed by CJI 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.

(2) Bhima Koregaon Case

In the Bhima Koregaon case, in which activists were arrested under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act.
The Supreme Court had relied on information submitted by the Maharashtra police in a sealed cover.

This practice appears to be unfavorable 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 the reasoning for their decisions.
Besides, it is argued that not providing access to such documents to the accused parties obstructs their passage to a fair trial and adjudication.