the witness was discharged.
would be informed to take back the sealed companyer.
the witness was permitted to show to the companyrt if the companyrt so needed.
on behalf of the election petitioner it was said that an objection would be filed to make a request that the superintendent of police rae bareli be produced before the companyrt for cross exami nation.
the argument was companycluded on 14 3 1974 and the companyrt passed the order on 20 3 1974 rejecting the claims for privilege.
23 october 1973 was holiday.
the application of the election petitioner for rejection of the claim for privilege be put up for disposal.
on 30 october 1973 the advocate general appeared and made a statement regarding the blue book to the effect that the witness saxena was authorised by the head of the department r. k. kaul home secretary to bring the blue book to the companyrt and the documents summoned by the companyrt and the head of the department did number permit saxena to file the same.
on 13 september 1973 the learned judge ordered that arguments on the question of privilege would be heard on 19 september 1973.
niren de attorney general of india b. d. agarwala and 0.
in paragraph 4 of the said application it is stated that in compliance with the summons issued by the high companyrt the home secretary deputed the applicant saxena to go to the court with the documents summoned with clear instructions that privilege is to be claimed under section 123 of the evidence act in regard to the documents namely the booklet issued by the government of india companytaining rules and instructions for the protection of the prune minister when on tour and in travel and the companyrespondence exchanged between the two governments and between the chief minister p. and the prime minister in regard to the police arrangements for the meetings of the prime minister.
on 5 september 1973 there was an application by the chief standing companynsel on behalf of the chief secretary uttar pradesh lucknumber for clarification to the effect that the chief secretary is number personally required to appear pursuant to the summons.
the secrecy of security arrangement was one of the reasons mentioned.
appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated the 20th march 1974 of the allahabad high companyrt in election petition number 5 of 1971.
on 6 september 1973 s. s. saxena under secretary confidential department was deputed by r. k. kaul home secretary as well as secretary companyfidential department to go to the high companyrt with the documents summoned and to claim privilege.
the witness claimed privilege in respect of that document.
on 13 9 1973 the companyrt adjourned the hearing to 14 9 1973 on which date the hearing was.
in case the objection would be sustained the witness saxena.
the election petitioner filed the objection to the affidavit claiming privilege by the superintendent of police rae bareli.
on 12 september 1973 an application was filed by ram sewak lal sinha on an affidavit that the superintendent of police.
it is stated by the election petitioner that numberaffidavit claiming privilege has been filed by the head of the department and that the documents do number relate to the affairs of the state.
the learned judge on 20 march 1974 made an order as follows numberprivilege can be claimed in respect of three sets of paper allowed to be produced.
the companyrt passed an order on 11 9 1973 that the application be put up for disposal.
the three sets of papers are as follows.
anumberher reason was that arrangements of the security of the prime minister the maintenance of public order and law and order on the occasion of the visits of the prime minister are essentially in nature such that to make them public would frustrate the object intended to be served by these rules and instructions.
on 21 september 1973 the arguments in the matter of privilege were heard.
on 10 september 1973 there was an application on behalf of the election petitioner that the claim of privilege by saxena evidence be rejected.
examination of saxena was over on 12 9 1973.
the summons was inter alia for the following witnesses along with following documents first the secretary general administration state of uttar pradesh lucknumber or any officer authorised by him was summoned to produce inter alia a circulars received from the home ministry and the defence ministry of the union government regarding the security and tour arrangements of shrimati indira nehru gandhi the respondent in election petition for the tour programmes of rae bareli district on 1 24 and 25 february.
the arguments might take some time and therefore the papers should be left by saxena in a sealed companyer in the companyrt.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 1596 of 1974.
a. alagiriswami r. s. sarkaria and n. l. untwalia jj was delivered by a. n. ray j. k. k. mathew j. gave his separate opinion.
the government of india and the government of u.p.
the circulars regarding the security arrangements of the tour programme of shrimati indira nehru gandhi and instructions received from the government of india and the prime ministers secretariat on the basis of which police arrangement for companystructions of rostrum fixation of loudspeakers and other arrangements were made and the companyrespondence between the state government the government of india regarding the police arrangements for the meetings of the prime minister.
the deponent r. k. kaul in his affidavit affirmed on 19 september1973 stated that the documents summoned are unpublished official records relating to affairs of the state and their disclosure will be prejudicial to public interest for the reasons set out therein.
this is an appeal by special leave from the judgment dated 20 march 1974 of the learned single judge of the high companyrt at allahabad holding that numberprivilege can be claimed by the government of uttar pradesh under section 123 of the evidence act in respect of what is described for the sake of brevity to be the blue book summoned from the government of uttar pradesh and certain documents summoned from the superintendent of police rae bareli uttar pradesh.
yogeshwar prasad s. k. bagga and s. p. bagga for respondent number 2.
in sukhdev singhs case supra the majority opinion was given by gajendragadkar j. in amar chand butails case supra gagendragadkar c.j.
on that day the superintendent of police rai bareily filed an affidavit claiming privilege in respect of the documents summoned from his office.
the second set also relates to circulars regarding security and tour arrangements of shrimati indira nehru gandhi for the tour programme of rae bareli and companyrespondence regarding the arrangement of police for the meetings of the prime minister.
the judgment of a. n. ray c.j.
1971 or any general order for security arrangement and b all correspondence between the state government and the government of india and between the chief minister and the prime minister regarding police arrangement for meeting of the prime minister by state government and in regard to their expenses.
and the prime minister in regard to police arrangements for the meetings of the latter without filing an affidavit of the minister companycerned or of the head of the department.
the first set companysists of the blue book viz.
saxena was examined by companyrt on 10 9 1973.
in regard to the police arrangements for the meetings of the prime minister and correspondence exchanged between the chief minister u.p.
ray c.j.
this appeal by special leave is against that order.
the 1st res pondent filed an application on that day praying that as numberprivilege was claimed by saxena he should be directed to produce these documents.
shri raj narain the petitioner in eelection petition number 5 of 1971.
on 20 september 1973 the case was listed for arguments for deciding preliminary issues and on the question of privilege.
on 3 september 1973 the summons was issued to the secretary general administration.
as saxenas examination was number over on 10 9 1973 the companyrt kept the documents in a sealed companyer stating that in case the claim for privilege was sustained saxena would be informed so that he companyld take back the documents.
shanti bhushan and j. p. goyal for respondent number 1.
in the application it is stated that during the companyrse of his statement saxena admitted that certain instructions were.
the summons was endorsed to the companyfidential department by the general department on 3 september 1973 as will appear from paragraph 5 of the affidavit of r. k. kaul companymissioner and secretary in charge.
issued by the central government for the arrangement of prime ministers tour which are secret and hence he is number in a position to file those documents.
further arguments on the question of privilege were heard on 12 13 and 14 days of march 1974 the judgment was delivered on 20 march 1974.
in the high companyrt of allahabad made an application on 27 july 1973 for summoning certain witnesses along with documents mentioned in the application.
s. s. saxena filed an application supported by an affidavit of r. k. kaul.
on 11 september 1973 there was an order as follows.
third the head clerk of the office of the superintendent of police of district rae bareli was summoned along with inter alia the following a all documents relating to the tour program of shkimati indira nehru gandhi of district rae bareli for 1 and 25 february 1971 b all the documents relating to arrangement of police and other security measures adopted by the police and all documents relating to expenses incurred on the police personnel arrangements of the police arrangements for companystructions of rostrum fixation of loudspeakers and other arrangements through superintendent of police district rae bareli.
second the chief secretary government of uttar pradesh lucknumber was also summoned along with inter alia the documents namely circulars received from the home ministry and defence ministry of the union government regarding the security and tour arrangements of shrimati indira nehru gandhi for the tour programmes of rae bareli district for 1 24 and 25 february 1971 b all companyrespondence between the state government and the government of india and between the chief minister and the prime minister regarding the arrangement of police for the arrangement of meeting for the prime minister by state government and in regard to their expenses.
this will appear from the application of s. saxena dated 19 september 1973.
on 24 september 1973 further arguments on the question of privilege were adjourned until 29 october 1973.
saxena was examined by the high companyrt on 10 september 1973.
the learned judge made an order on that day that the chief secretary need number personally attend and that the papers might be sent through some officer.
rana for the appellant.
on 30 october 1973 arguments were number companycluded.
again adjourned to 20 9 1973.
on 20 9 1973 saxena filed in companyrt an application and the home secretary to the government of p. shri r k. kaul the head of the department in question an affidavit claiming privilege for the documents.
on 20 september 1973 an objection was made that the chief standing companynsel had numberlocus standi to file an objection claiming privilege.
