Allow Cookies!
By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
In a very interesting judgment given by the Delhi High Court in the case of Sanjaya Bahel v. Union of India & Others, it was observed that, the United Nations is not a “State” under the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India and not amenable to the jurisdiction of the Court under Article 226.
The Petitioner was an employee for the UNO and had not been paid for 3 months along with being charged with misconduct.The petitioner indicted before the US Federal Court. He was convicted the petitioner in the trial and sentenced him to 97 months of imprisonment and 2 years of mandatory probation. In 2016, the Petitioner filed a writ petition before the Supreme Court of the United States and it too was dismissed. In 2018, he wrote a letter to the Ministry of External Affairs in New Delhi to initiate legal action against respondents' under Section 86 of Civil Procedure Code, 1908. The Ministry stated that,respondent and its officials enjoy immunity under the United Nations (Privileges and Immunities) Act, 1947 along with the fact that the consent of the government was not needed for initiating a legal suit as the respondent is not a foreign state but only an Internal Organization of UNO.
The Petitioner contended that if there is a right then a remedy has to be present and a person cannot be left without a remedy. The Petitioner was left with no other option, and hence he approached the Court as a last resort for direction to respondents' for their failure to follow due process of law in petitioner's case. He also added that according to Article II of the Schedule of the Act, 1947, it gives the respondent a blanket immunity which in furtherance makes the respondent a judge in its own cause which is against the justice system.
It was further submitted that, petitioner is not seeking any relief for which the respondent has to invoke the immunity granted to it under the Act, 1947. The Petitioner is seeking to invoke writ jurisdiction for the purpose of non-adherence of the due process.
Lastly, the Court observed that, the immunity granted is comprehensive and the applicability of any national law is subject to the waiver of the immunity by respondent. If the respondent has not waived the said immunity, the clause relating to the observance of national laws will be of no help to the petitioner.
86540
103860
630
114
59824