NEW DELHI: The government on Wednesday told the Supreme Court it could invoke the Official Secrets Act against a national daily for publishing reports on the Rafale jet deal based on classified documents stolen from the Ministry of Defence. Attorney General K K Venugopal told a three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi, “Publication of Defence Ministry notes on Rafale deal violates Section 3 (spying) and 5 (wrongful communication of confidential information) of the Official Secrets Act.”
Those who put them in public domain could be hauled up for contempt of court as well, he said adding he will file an affidavit on Thursday on the proposed line of action against the offenders.
Later, N Ram, chairman of The Hindu group, told the media he wrote the signed pieces since they were matters of public interest, adding he will exercise his right to protect his sources.
While the court fixed March 14 for further hearing in the matter, Venugopal was against any review of its December verdict on the Rafale deal.
He said petitioners Yashwant Sinha, Arun Shourie and Prashant Bhushan had not disclosed who in the ministry had stolen the documents.
“If an FIR is to be registered, it will name the petitioners, the newspaper and the reporters as accused,” the A-G said adding the entire effort was to delay the acquisition of the 36 fighter jets.
He also referred to the recent Indo-Pak conflict where ancient MiGs were scrambled take on much superior Pak F-16s, to underline the urgency for the Rafale buys. But the bench said there was no stay on the acquisition. It also said if the documents were stolen, it was for the government to put its house in order.
“You may question the bonafide of the petitioners and ask us to look at those documents with suspicion. But to say that something which is now already in public domain is untouchable for us may not be a correct argument in law,” the bench pointed out.
Justice Joseph’s point
The issue of national security doesn’t arise when the question is the plea for investigation wasn’t considered. Are you going to take shelter under national security when the allegations are about some grave crime, corruption?
Attorney General’s retort
This is the only country where a court is examining a defence deal as if it is an administrative issue. Defence procurements can’t be judicially examined. Do we have to come to the court to justify when we declare war, when we declare peace? Do we have to come and seek permission of the court every time?