Delhi high court orders security for CBI team in JMM case
The Delhi high court has ordered the police to provide adequate
security cover to the three-member Central Bureau of Investigation
team which is looking into the multi-million-rupee JMM MPs payoff
case in view of the ''nature of the investigation'' being conducted
by the officers.
In its final order disposing of Rashtriya Mukti Morcha President
Ravinder Kumar's public interest petition on the bribes-for-votes
case, a division bench comprising Justice Y K Sabharwal and Justice
D K Jain placed on record its appreciation of the officers' work,
conducted with ''great responsibility, promptitude and ability''.
The bench also noted that the three officers - DIG Satish Chander
Shrivastava, SP Vivek Johri and SP A K Sinha - ''did not yield
to direct or indirect pressure, some traces of which are available
on CBI files''.
With regard to the nature of the investigation conducted by the
officers, the bench said it is directing the commissioner of police,
Delhi where the officers are at present posted, to provide adequate
security to Shrivastava, Johri and Sinha.
The judges noted that with senior counsel Gopal Subramaniam presenting
the final report on the CBI investigation in the case on January
22, ''we feel that now no useful purpose would be served by this
court continuing with the writ petition and the stage has reached
when we should dispose of the matter by issuing certain directions''.
The bench further noted that it was disposing of the petition
with an element of satisfaction in the manner in which it had
finally come to an end.
''This public interest litigation initiated about a year earlier
seems to be of singular importance in Indian history of parliamentary
democracy,'' the bench noted.
It hoped that considering the nature of the case, the trial by
the special CBI judge would be completed expeditiously ''as far
as possible, the trial may be conducted from day to day, without
of course, in any manner, prejudicing the rights of the parties''.
The judges observed that the trial, in which former prime minister
P V Narasimha Rao and 20 others, including at least 11 former
or sitting MPs, two former chief ministers and several former
federal ministers are accused, should be concluded without undue
delay so that if these people are innocent, their names are cleared
and if guilty, they may face the consequences in accordance with
law.
Apart from the CBI officers, the bench also had a special word
of praise for senior counsel Gopal Subramaniam, who took over
the case in August 1996. The bench noted that the course of the
case changed after Subramaniam took over. The judges also noted
the ''able assistance'' of public prosecutor A K Dutt, who appeared
along with Subramaniam.
The bench said that Subramaniam not only fully realised his duty
as an officer of the court but also his duties towards the nation.
The judges also placed on record their appreciation of the great
assistance provided by senior counsel Pran Nath Lekhi who along
with counsel Vijay Chaudhary represented petitioner Ravinder Kumar.
In a word of praise for the media, the bench noted that in reporting
the case, the media conducted itself with responsibility and maintained
due restraint.
It further directed that a copy of the order be placed on the
personal files of Shrivastava, Johri and Sinha, who were appointed
officers of the court on October 7, 1996.
The judges noted that to begin with the seriousness and expedition
which the investigation deserved was lacking, resulting in court
direction from time to time.
Justice Sabharwal and Justice Jain also noted that the income
tax department had taken certain steps against those accused of
having received huge bribes to vote in favour of the Narasimha
Rao-led government in July 1993. ''We hope that the income tax
department would continue their efforts as permissible in law,
with the same vigour to conclude the proceedings initiated by
it against various persons expeditiously''.
Summing up the proceedings in the case after Ravinder Kumar filed
the petition in February 1996, the bench said that it had noted
in its order of May 24 1996, directing the CBI to register a regular
case on the basis of Kumar's complaint, that probity in public
life is to be maintained at every cost, whosoever may be the casualty
and irrespective of the height and might of the persons concerned.
This was necessary for the existence of democracy and rule of
law, which is life and blood of the constitution of India.
Later in the October 7 order constituting the three-member team
of Shrivastava-Johri-Sinha as officers of court, the bench had
quoted from the Santhanam Committee report on Prevention of Corruption,
as cited by Lekhi.
The report highlighted the measures required to be taken for creation
of social climate, both among public servants and in the general
public, in which bribery and corruption may not flourish and a
new tradition of integrity can be established only after the example
is set by those who have the ultimate responsibility for the governance
of the country, namely the ministers of the central and state
governments.
The CBI has in its three chargesheets filed on October 30, December
9 and January 22, accused 21 top politicians of having entered
into a criminal conspiracy to save the Rao government during a
vote of no-confidence on July 28 1993 by giving and taking bribes.
The accused are: former prime minister P V Narasimha Rao, former
federal ministers Buta Singh, Satish Sharma, Ajit Singh and Ram
Lakhan Singh Yadav, former Haryana chief minister Bhajan Lal,
former Karnataka chief minister Veerappa Moily, his cabinet colleagues
H M Revanna and Ramalinga Reddy, former or sitting MPs Suraj Mandal,
Shibhu Soren, Simon Marandi, Shailendra Mahto, Ram Sharan Yadav,
Abhay Pratap Singh, Anadi Charan Das, Haji Ghulam Mohammad Khan,
V Rajeshwara Rao, Roshan Lal and Bangalore-based industrialists
D Audikeshavalu and M Thimmegowda.
UNI
|
