AJIT MOHAN & ORS. versus LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF DELHI & ORS.

Citation: [2021] 14 S.C.R. 611 · Decided: 08-07-2021 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: SANJAY KISHAN KAUL · Disposal: Dismissed

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · cites 24 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
611
AJIT MOHAN & ORS.
v.
LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY
OF DELHI & ORS.
(Writ Petition (C) No. 1088 of 2020)
JULY 08, 2021
[SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, DINESH MAHESHWARI AND
HRISHIKESH ROY, JJ.]
Constitution of India – Articles 194, 105 and 19(1)(a), (2) –
Online hate speech content – Social media platforms – Accountability
of – Parliamentary Privilege/ Privilege of Legislature – In the wake
of Delhi riots, Legislative Assembly of the National Capital Territory
of Delhi constituted a Committee on Peace and Harmony – Summons
issued to Managing Director of Facebook India, to appear before
it – Challenge to – Impugned summons withdrawn, new summons
issued – Held: There is no dispute about the right of the Assembly
or the Committee to proceed on grounds of breach of privilege per
se – Power to compel attendance by initiating privilege proceedings
is an essential power – Members and non-Members (like the
petitioners) can equally be directed to appear before the Committee
and depose on oath – Petitioners, more so with their expanded role
as an intermediary, can hardly contend that they have some
exceptional privilege to abstain from appearing before a committee
duly constituted by the Assembly – However, on facts, only a summons
has been issued for appearance before the Committee – Issue of
privileges is premature – The question of any privilege power being
exercised is yet far away – Plea raised on the exercise of privilege
is a pre-emptive strike – Complete plea of the petitioners is premature
as nothing has really happened other than them having been asked
to appear before the Committee – Facebook cannot excuse
themselves from appearing pursuant to the New Summons issued –
Information Technology Act, 2000 – s.69A – Government of
National Capital Territory Act, 1991.
Information Technology Act, 2000 – Online hate speech
content on social media platforms – Role, accountability of such
platforms – Plea of Facebook that it is merely a platform posting
[2021] 14 S.C.R. 611
611
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
612
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2021] 14 S.C.R.
third party information and has no role in generating, controlling or
modulating that information – Held: Not accepted – These platforms
are by no means altruistic in character but rather employ business
models that can be highly privacy intrusive and have the potential to
polarize public debates – Further, business model of intermediaries
like the petitioner being one across countries, they cannot be permitted
to take contradictory stands in different jurisdictions.
Constitution of India – Seventh Schedule, List II, Entries 1, 2
& 18 – Committee on Peace and Harmony constituted by Delhi
Legislative Assembly in the wake of Delhi riots – Validity of – Held:
The Assembly is no different from any other State assembly, except
to the extent that certain powers in List II of the Seventh Schedule
have not been conferred (i.e., Entries 1, 2 & 18) – Assembly admittedly
does not have any power to legislate on aspects of law and order
and police in view of Entries 1 and 2 of List II in the Seventh Schedule
inter alia being excluded – Assembly does not only perform the
function of legislating; there are many other aspects of governance
which can form part of the essential functions of the Legislative
Assembly and consequently the Committee – Committee can trace
its legitimacy to several Entries in List II and List III without
encroaching upon the excluded fields of public order or police to
undertake a concerted effort albeit not to the extent as canvassed –
In the larger context, the concept of peace and harmony goes much
beyond law and order and police, more so in view of on the-ground
governance being in the hands of the Delhi Government.
Constitution of India – Articles 194, 105 – Functions
performed by an elected Parliament or Assembly not confined to
only enacting laws – Role of Committees constituted by legislative
bodies in the functioning and the working of the Houses Held: Unless
the committee embarks on a course completely devoid of its functional
mandate specified by the Assembly, or the Assembly itself lacks
jurisdiction to deal with the subject matter, the widest amplitude
must be given to the functioning of these committees – The
inquisitorial role of the committee in the functioning of House is of
great significance, and as recognized, the investigation of a
complicated social problem prior to legislation often rests frequently
on such legislative committees – Intel

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.