NDLI: Indian Social Action Forum (insaf) Vs. Union of India

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act Purpose of enactment
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Judgement
Jurisdiction	India
Act(s) Referred	Foreign Contribution (regulation) Act, 2010 (42 of 2010)
Case(s) Referred	Referred Case 0 Referred Case 1 Referred Case 2 Referred Case 3 Referred Case 4 Referred Case 5 Referred Case 6
Case Type	Appeal
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Appeal Disposed Off
Headnote	Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, 2010: Purpose of enactment – Held: It is made to consolidate the law to regulate the acceptance and utilisation of foreign contribution or foreign hospitality by certain individuals or associations or companies and to prohibit acceptance and utilisation of foreign contribution or foreign hospitality for any activities detrimental to the national interest and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, 2010: ss.5(1) and 5(4) – Constitutional validity of – The power conferred by the Act on the Central Government to declare an organisation to be an organisation of a political nature u/s.5(1) of the Act was challenged by the Appellant on the ground that no guidelines are provided for the exercise of such power – s.5(4) of the Act was assailed on the ground that the authority to which a representation made by the aggrieved party is to be forwarded, has not been specified – Held: s.5(1) does not suffer from the vice of vagueness inviting the wrath of Art. 14 – s.5(4) cannot be declared as unconstitutional only on the ground that the authority to whom representation should be made is not specified – Constitution of India – Arts.14, 19(1)(a), 19(1)(c) and 21.Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Rules, 2011: rr.3(i), 3(v) and 3(vi) – Constitutional validity of – According to the Appellant, the guidelines provided in r.3 of the Rules are impermissibly wide, giving arbitrary discretion to the authorities which would result in abuse of the power – It was alleged in the Writ Petition that the Rules suffer from unreasonableness and arbitrariness – Appellant prayed for declaring rr.3(i), 3(v) and 3(vi) as violative of the fundamental rights enshrined in Arts.14, 19(1)(a), 19(1)(c) and 21 of the Constitution – Held: According to r.3(i), an organisation having avowed political objectives in its memorandum of association or bye laws is an organisation of a political nature – As the intention of the legislature is to prohibit foreign funds in active politics, an Association with avowed political objectives (i.e. to play a role in active politics or party politics) cannot be permitted access to foreign funds – There is no ambiguity in the provision and hence, cannot be termed as vague – r.3 (i) is not ultra vires the Act – r.3 (v) deals with organisations of farmers, workers, students etc. which are not directly aligned to any political party but objectives of which include steps towards advancement of ‘political interests’ of such groups – Prohibition from receiving foreign aid, either directly or indirectly, by those who are involved in active politics is to ensure that the values of a sovereign democratic republic are protected – On the other hand, such of those voluntary organisations which have absolutely no connection with either party politics or active politics cannot be denied access to foreign contributions – Therefore, such of those organisations which are working for the social and economic welfare of the society cannot be brought within the purview of the Act or the Rules by enlarging the scope of the term ‘political interests’ – The expression ‘political interests’ in r.3 (v) has to be construed to be in connection with active politics or party politics – Any organisation which habitually engages itself in or employs common methods of political action like ‘bandh’ or ‘hartal’, ‘rasta roko’, ‘rail roko’ or ‘jail bharo’ in support of public causes can also be declared as an organisation of political nature, according to the guideline prescribed in r.3 (vi) – Support to public causes by resorting to legitimate means of dissent like bandh, hartal etc. cannot deprive an organisation of its legitimate right of receiving foreign contribution – It is clear from the provision itself that bandh, hartal, rasta roko etc., are treated as common methods of political action – Any organisation which supports the cause of a group of citizens agitating for their rights without a political goal or objective cannot be penalized by being declared as an organisation of a political nature – To save this provision from being declared as unconstitutional, it is held that it is only those organisations which have connection with active politics or take part in party politics, that are covered by r.3 (vi).Interpretation of Statutes: Two interpretations – Held: In case of ambiguity in the language used in the provision of a statute, the Courts can take aid from the historical background, the Parliamentary debates and the aims and objects of the Act – Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Rules, 2011.
Judge	Hon'ble Mr. Justice L. Nageswara Rao
Neutral Citation	2020 INSC 290
Petitioner	Indian Social Action Forum (insaf)
Respondent	Union Of India
SCR	[2020] 4 S.C.R. 903
Judgement Date	2020-03-06
Case Number	1510

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

Indian Social Action Forum (insaf) Vs. Union of India

Please Log-in to view this content

C.b.i Vs. Pratap Chandra Reddy

INDIAN SOCIAL ACTION FORUM (INSAF) v. UNION OF INDIA [ W.P.(C) 4982/2013 INDLHC 4548 (19 September 2013)]

INDIAN SOCIAL ACTION FORUM(INSAF) v. THE UNION OF INDIA [ W.P.(C) 5793/2011 INDLHC 4538 (16 September 2011)]

Noel Harper & Ors. Vs. Union of India & Anr.

Social Action Forum for Manav Adhikar and Another Vs. Union of India Ministry of Law and Justice and Others

Shanti Prasad Jain Vs. The Director of Enforcement

Ram Rattan Gupta Vs. Director of Enforcement, Foreign Exchange Regulation, and Another

Monotosh Saha Vs. Special Director, Enforcement Directorate and Anr.

Thirumalai Chemicals Limited Vs. Union of India & Ors.

Indian Social Action Forum (insaf) Vs. Union of India

Indian Social Action Forum (insaf) Vs. Union of India

Please Log-in to view this content

Similar Documents

C.b.i Vs. Pratap Chandra Reddy

INDIAN SOCIAL ACTION FORUM (INSAF) v. UNION OF INDIA [ W.P.(C) 4982/2013 INDLHC 4548 (19 September 2013)]

INDIAN SOCIAL ACTION FORUM(INSAF) v. THE UNION OF INDIA [ W.P.(C) 5793/2011 INDLHC 4538 (16 September 2011)]

Noel Harper & Ors. Vs. Union of India & Anr.

Social Action Forum for Manav Adhikar and Another Vs. Union of India Ministry of Law and Justice and Others

Shanti Prasad Jain Vs. The Director of Enforcement

Ram Rattan Gupta Vs. Director of Enforcement, Foreign Exchange Regulation, and Another

Monotosh Saha Vs. Special Director, Enforcement Directorate and Anr.

Thirumalai Chemicals Limited Vs. Union of India & Ors.

Indian Social Action Forum (insaf) Vs. Union of India