Dataset Viewer
Auto-converted to Parquet Duplicate
audio
audioduration (s)
0.08
28
text
stringlengths
3
451
chunk_number
int64
1
2.55k
But I was on page 24 of my written submissions.
1
Then I'll come back to my written submissions.
10
No, I am just putting myself as a contractor.
100
And as I pointed out, the beginning is giving us fruits.
1,000
Digitized money is bringing clean money into the system.
1,001
I've given the figures of payment made by digital mode.
1,002
Then, Kesavan and Bharti,
1,003
In exercising the power of judicial review, the courts cannot be oblivious of practical needs of the government.
1,004
The door has to be left open for trial and error.
1,005
Constitutional law, like other mortal contrivances, has to take some chances.
1,006
Opportunity must be allowed for vindicating reasonable belief by experience.
1,007
The government, which consists of all politicians, the parliament, consisting of all people in politics, they discussed this threadbare and found that there may be some lacuna in the system, but this is under the circumstances, the best system.
1,008
That trial and error, the government is entitled to.
1,009
That example I thought was great.
101
Then, I am not reading Mafatlal, but please come to, I am not reading AK Roy also, please treat it as red.
1,010
Please come to
1,011
PUCL also, it's on the same lines.
1,012
Therefore, there is no point in duplicating.
1,013
Then I have pointed out legitimate state interest.
1,014
So your lordships would always balance.
1,015
I have argued this, but I will not take your lordships time further.
1,016
But the legitimate state interest is linked to public interest.
1,017
So you have the right to information, no denial.
1,018
But you have the information which company purchased how many bonds, and you have the information in public domain which party got how many electoral bonds.
1,019
My learned friend's client is a leader of a Congress party in Madhya Pradesh.
102
If anything beyond that is encouraging,
1,020
Yes, but economy to enhance that your lawsuits can balance.
1,021
And that would be in the legitimate states interest that public interest would be of paramount consideration when you're not just examine this model, but please see better pay better 130.
1,022
It is submitted that judgment in PUCL and S.O.
1,023
Malhotra, which were referred to by them, sought disclosure of information which was already in the knowledge and possession of the state authorities.
1,024
When they say that you declare what is your property, you declare what are the criminal proceedings.
1,025
These are all in public domain.
1,026
At once, platform you declare, but here you are trying to
1,027
lift the veil of confidentiality, which is, by design, made a part of the very system, and which is the pivotal part of that system.
1,028
And even the government doesn't know it.
1,029
Therefore, I'm giving the example of Madhya Pradesh.
103
So right to information cannot be claimed from me.
1,030
Now, your Lordships may I kindly go to Lord
1,031
page 60, but one passage from Puttuswamy, Puttaswamy, is the majority view.
1,032
Of course, all views are concurring except on the ground of, except the question of money.
1,033
Privacy, a lot of people get that.
1,034
Privacy and proportionality are two interlocking themes that recur consistently in the above judgments.
1,035
Privacy also construed as informational self-determination is a fundamental value.
1,036
There is a consistent emphasis on the impact on personal dignity if private information is widely available and individuals are not able to decide upon its disclosure and use.
1,037
This right of controlling the extent of the availability and use of one personal data is seen as a building block of data protection, especially in an environment where the state of technology facilitates ease of collection, analysis, and dissemination of information.
1,038
Daniel, I would like to kindly see how the judgments cited are different, what I have already said.
1,039
And I'm saying that a contractor
104
Yes.
1,040
level playing field, my Lord, I have dealt with at page 64.
1,041
But my Lord, I have already, my Lord, orally made submissions before your Lordship, my Lord.
1,042
But kindly see, my Lord, 151, Para 151 at page 65.
1,043
I have already marked, my Lord, which portion I'll skip and which portion I think I must assist your Lordship with.
1,044
151 the petitioner claims that there is an unincumbent by incumbent bias as a large amount of money go to the ruling party It is submitted that whether such an incumbent bias exists And if it does what its extent would be is a question only irrelevant to determining the constitutionality of the scheme and my lord I have already said that that has been the trend Ruling party gets maximum because ruling party has the confidence of the maximum people
1,045
Yes.
1,046
Now, my lord, page 65, bottom.
1,047
My lord, I have said that secrecy, per se, is not alien concept in even electoral issues.
1,048
Secrecy of ballot.
1,049
wants to donate to Congress would have an apprehension that BJP might continue to be in power or vice versa.
105
That's something separate.
1,050
In the uneven level playing field, you've referred to fairness of elections.
1,051
That issue has not been addressed.
1,052
Correct.
1,053
Has that issue with regard to fairness in elections been, or because of the mismatch between the money part, has that been addressed here?
1,054
Because that may be a larger picture, not specific, like Malone.
1,055
I'll just, again, Malone, try and attempt to point out.
1,056
No, you have argued that because of,
1,057
Ruling party has always been getting substantially more donations.
1,058
Average Indian voter, be it corporate or an illiterate voter, we have to accept this fact.
1,059
If he gives donation to the ruling party in Madhya Pradesh,
106
And we should be proud of that.
1,060
He is a very intelligent decision maker.
1,061
A ruling party in 2013, though ruling party, may not get maximum political contribution because the voter knows
1,062
that in 2014, the wind is somewhere else.
1,063
We have to trust his discretion.
1,064
So ruling party is not getting maximum because of the scheme.
1,065
That's my submission.
1,066
According to you, otherwise, the ruling party would get maximum.
1,067
Always.
1,068
Even before this scheme, I have shown from 2005 to 2014, whoever was ruling party,
1,069
He might have a element of fear that Congress might form the government.
107
BJP is a ruling party in one state, state of Odisha.
1,070
They have maximum political contribution.
1,071
That's the trend.
1,072
That's how the people of India contribute.
1,073
It's not as if because of the scheme, the ruling party is getting any benefit, and there is no level playing field.
1,074
Yes.
1,075
I have analyzed Malhotra's secret ballot.
1,076
That secrecy person is not antithetical to free and fair elections.
1,077
Sometimes it enhances free and fair elections.
1,078
Like Malhotra, in my respectful submission, the present case.
1,079
That confidentiality, the donor wants to ensure.
108
Kindly come to page 70, where I have 165, where I have attempted to address how this scheme accelerates or enhances free and fair election.
1,080
It is submitted that a conjoint reading of the principles of secret ballot and the right to privacy and the article 21 clearly postulates that there exists a claim on part of the donors to make donations without fear of reprisal.
1,081
It is submitted that such right would obviously not be absolute and would have to be counterbalanced with public interest and concept of free and fair elections and further optimized with policy interest of bringing the first step of shift from cash to banking channel in political donations.
1,082
It is submitted that the balancing element in the present policy is clause 7.4 of the electoral bond scheme
1,083
clearly provides for disclosure in case of appropriate proceedings before the competent court or criminal proceedings.
1,084
But then I'll not bother you a lot further, but then kindly come to page 73, financial policy and limits of judicial review.
1,085
But I'm not going to read the whole, I'll just read the highlighted part, because that would not in the facts of the case, be very, very relevant and direct for assisting your lawsuits.
1,086
But first is Rustam Kavasji Cooper, your lawsuits, not know the judgment, but it's a bank next validation case.
1,087
Then Garg is a better bond.
1,088
End of preview. Expand in Data Studio
README.md exists but content is empty.
Downloads last month
57