[ad_1]
CHENNAI: Flagging the perils of relying on information available in crowd-sourced websites like Wikipedia, Madras high court has quashed an NIA court’s order refusing to discharge a person charged under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act.
The special court for NIA cases had extracted description of a banned organisation from Wikipedia and rejected the plea of Ziyavudeen Baqavi, who had been accused of sharing posts from a social media account of a ‘fundamentalist’ organisation.
He was charged for sedition under the IPC and for offences under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act. Challenging the same, he moved the special court for discharge from the case.
His plea was rejected by the special court which relied on contents shared in Wikipedia to conclude the ‘aim and objective’ of the alleged fundamentalist organisation.
However, a division bench of Justice M Sundar and Justice M Nirmal Kumar disapproved of the special court’s conclusion and observed that courts must refrain from relying on crowd-sourced websites like Wikipedia in legal dispute resolution.
Concurring with the submissions of Baqavi, the bench said, “the special court explicitly relied on Wikipedia for description of the entity. This apart, the special court order was silent with respect to the case laws cited by the petitioner and had merely brushed aside the same without any discussion on the case laws.”
The bench then set aside the order and remanded back the matter to the special court for fresh consideration.
The special court for NIA cases had extracted description of a banned organisation from Wikipedia and rejected the plea of Ziyavudeen Baqavi, who had been accused of sharing posts from a social media account of a ‘fundamentalist’ organisation.
He was charged for sedition under the IPC and for offences under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act. Challenging the same, he moved the special court for discharge from the case.
His plea was rejected by the special court which relied on contents shared in Wikipedia to conclude the ‘aim and objective’ of the alleged fundamentalist organisation.
However, a division bench of Justice M Sundar and Justice M Nirmal Kumar disapproved of the special court’s conclusion and observed that courts must refrain from relying on crowd-sourced websites like Wikipedia in legal dispute resolution.
Concurring with the submissions of Baqavi, the bench said, “the special court explicitly relied on Wikipedia for description of the entity. This apart, the special court order was silent with respect to the case laws cited by the petitioner and had merely brushed aside the same without any discussion on the case laws.”
The bench then set aside the order and remanded back the matter to the special court for fresh consideration.
#Dont #rely #Wikipedia #info #verdicts #Madras #high #court #court #India #News
