Key Facts
The Supreme Court on Monday refused to grant anticipatory bail to an RTI activist and his associate, observing that RTI activism has turned into a new business. A bench of Justices Sandeep Mehta and Vijay Bishnoi dismissed the bail plea of activist Rakesh Kumar Behl, who had challenged the Punjab and Haryana High Court's order denying him pre-arrest bail.
Court's Observations
During the hearing, Justice Mehta remarked, "RTI activism has become a new business. The Central government has issued funds, it will take care of the construction of the road. You are nobody. So-called RTI activist! Yellow journalism. Dismissed." Justice Bishnoi echoed similar sentiments, asking, "Who are you to monitor the construction of all these roads? Are you some superior authority or what?"
Details of the Case
According to the FIR, Behl and his aide Rajiv Kumar alias Mintu allegedly obstructed ongoing road construction work in Batala, Gurdaspur district, Punjab. They are accused of intimidating the complainant supervising the work, using derogatory language against laborers, and causing injuries to the complainant. The FIR was registered under multiple sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) 2023, including Sections 304 (obstructing public servant), 132 (assault), 221 (intimidation), 121 (waging war), and 351 (criminal intimidation), along with Section 3 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
Background
Behl had approached the Supreme Court after the Punjab and Haryana High Court on May 14 denied him anticipatory bail, stating that the allegations disclosed specific and direct involvement in obstructing government work. His counsel argued that the case was a false implication arising from their efforts to highlight corruption in road construction. However, the apex court did not find merit in the plea.
Impact and What Readers Should Know
This judgment underscores the judiciary's stance on misuse of RTI activism for personal gain or obstruction of public works. The court's strong remarks signal that RTI activists must exercise their rights responsibly and not overstep their authority. The case also highlights the legal consequences of interfering with government projects.
FAQ
- What did the Supreme Court say about RTI activism? The Supreme Court observed that RTI activism has become a new business, and refused to grant anticipatory bail to an activist who allegedly obstructed road construction work.
- Who is the RTI activist involved in this case? The activist is Rakesh Kumar Behl, who along with his aide Rajiv Kumar alias Mintu, was accused of obstructing road construction in Batala, Gurdaspur district, Punjab.
- What sections were invoked against the accused? The FIR was registered under Sections 304, 132, 221, 121, 351 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) 2023 and Section 3 of the SC/ST Act.
Source: www.hindustantimes.com