Supreme Court tears into practice of ‘sealed cover jurisprudence’

What is the News?

Recently, the two separate Benches of the Supreme Court have criticized the “Sealed Cover Jurisprudence” practised by the Government in Courts.

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.

While a specific law does not define the doctrine of sealed cover, the Supreme Court derives its power from:

Rule 7 of Supreme Court Rules: It states that 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, except if the Chief Justice himself orders that the opposite party be allowed to access it. 

Section 123 of the Evidence Act: It says that the official unpublished documents relating to state affairs are protected, and a public officer cannot be compelled to disclose such documents.

Why has the Sealed Cover Jurisprudence been criticized?

Firstly, sealed cover practice is not favourable to the principles of transparency and accountability of the Indian justice system.

Secondly, it enlarges the scope for arbitrariness in court decisions, as judges are supposed to lay down the reasoning for their decisions, but this cannot be done when they are based upon information submitted confidentially.

Thirdly, not providing access to such documents to the accused parties obstructs their passage to a fair trial and adjudication.

What are recent Supreme Court views on Sealed Cover Jurisprudence?

The Supreme Court was critical about how the government and its agencies file reports in sealed envelopes directly in court without sharing the contents with the opposite party. 

This is usually done on the ground that the contents are highly sensitive in nature and may injure even national security or public order. Another reason given by State agencies mostly in money laundering cases is disclosure would affect the ongoing investigation.

However, the court said this sealed cover practice should be used in exceptional cases in which the court, for the benefit of the parties, do not want them to see the government files. For example, like in a case of child sexual abuse.

Source: This post is based on the article “Supreme Court tears into practice of ‘sealed cover jurisprudence” published in The Hindu on 16th Mar 2022.