Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 150
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]
Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 151
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]
Warning (512): Unable to emit headers. Headers sent in file=/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php line=853 [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 48]
Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 148]
Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 181]
LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Graft cases against public servants: Supreme Court raps PMO for delay in okaying A Raja prosecution

Graft cases against public servants: Supreme Court raps PMO for delay in okaying A Raja prosecution

Share this article Share this article
published Published on Feb 1, 2012   modified Modified on Feb 1, 2012
-The Economic Times
 
The Supreme Court has pulled up the Prime Minister's Office for taking 16 months to decide on an application from Janata Party PresidentSubramaniam Swamy to prosecute then telecom minister A Raja. 

However, a bench comprising Justices AK Ganguly and GS Singhvi appeared to absolve Prime Minister Manmohan Singh of any personal blame on the ground that he could not be expected to go into details of every case before him. 

"We have no doubt that if the prime minister had been apprised of the factual and legal position regarding the representation made by Swamy he would have surely taken appropriate decision and would not have allowed the matter to linger for a period of more than one year. By the very nature of the office held by the prime minister, he was not expected to personally look into minute details of each case placed before him and has to depend on his advisers and other officers. Unfortunately, those who were expected to give proper advice to him and place full facts and legal position before him failed to do so," the bench said. 

These remarks appear to have diluted the political fallout of the judgment, though BJP leaders were quick to claim that the verdict was an embarrassment to the government. In interviews to television channels Swamy described the verdict as loss of prestige for the PM. 

The PMO seized on the partial reprove and in a statement said: "We welcome the fact that both the learned judges have completely vindicated the prime minister whilst appreciating the onerous duties of his office. The government is examining their directions regarding the manner in which applications for sanctions are to be dealt with." 

Pointing to the inherent loopholes that delay decision on granting prosecution, Justice Ganguly said: "If we look at Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, we find that no time limit is mentioned. This has virtually armed the sanctioning authority with unbridled power which has often resulted in protecting the guilty and perpetuating criminality and injustice in society." 

The judges said the government could not sit on complaints seeking sanction to prosecute. It recommended Parliament to bring a law fixing a time limit of four months. "While considering the issue regarding grant or refusal of sanction, the only thing which the competent authority is required to see is whether the material placed by the complainant or the investigating agency prima facie discloses commission of an offence. The competent authority cannot undertake a detailed inquiry to decide whether or not the allegations made against the public servant are true," said the bench. 

The judges said citizens had a fundamental right to file corruption complaints against government officials and could approach the courts if dissatisfied by the reply. The bench said, "in either case (grant or refusal of such sanctions), the decision taken on the complaint made by a citizen is required to be communicated to him and if he feels aggrieved by such decision, then he can avail appropriate legal remedy." The court noted that out of total 319 requests for sanction to prosecute the decision were pending in 126 cases. 

All pervasive corruption posed a grave danger to constitutional governance and ate up the rights of the people in the country. "Today, corruption in our country not only poses a grave danger to the concept of constitutional governance, it also threatens the very foundation of Indian democracy and rule of law," Justice Ganguly said in his separate but concurring judgement with Justice GS Singhvi. 

"The magnitude of corruption in our public life is incompatible with the concept of a socialist, secular democratic republic. It cannot be disputed that where corruption begins all rights end," said Justice Ganguly. "Corruption devalues human rights and chokes development" he added.

The Economic Times, 1 February, 2012, http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics/nation/graft-cases-against-public-servants-supreme-court-raps-pmo-for-delay-in-okaying-a-raja-prosecution/articl


Related Articles

 

Write Comments

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

Video Archives

Archives

share on Facebook
Twitter
RSS
Feedback
Read Later

Contact Form

Please enter security code
      Close