Chargesheet against Rao invalid: counsel

The counsel of former prime minister P V Narasimha Rao questioned the very validity of chargesheeting Rao and 20 others in the multi-million-rupee MPs ''bribery'' case. MPs did not hold office and were, therefore, beyond the purview of the Prevention of Corruption Act, Rao’s counsel R K Anand said in a Delhi court Tuesday.

The fact that no sanction from the government was required to prosecute MPs showed they were not public servants, Anand told the trial of court Additional Sessions Judge Ajit Bharihoke. So if the MPs accepted money or any other kind of gratification, it could not be construed as bribe, Anand said.

Anand also pointed out that the oaths administered to ministers and MPs were different. While ministers took ''oath of office,'' members of Parliament or state legislatures took an oath merely to fill a seat in the House.

Besides Rao, the others accused in the case relating to bribing of MPs to defeat the no-confidence motion against the Rao government in July 1993 included former union ministers Satish Sharma, Buta Singh and Ajit Singh and former chief ministers M Veerappa Moily and Bhajan Lal of Karnataka and Haryana respectively.

Counsel Anand said the fact that MPs merely occupied seats and did not hold office had been made clear by the rule pertaining to election of the President of India. It stipulated that any one elected to the office of President would deemed to have vacated his seat in any legislature held by him.

He cited the Supreme Court judgement in connection with a corruption case which had stated that A R Antulay could be held guilty in his capacity as chief minister and not as an MLA.

He also said an office could be taken to be existent only if it was there independent of the holder of an office. In this connection, he relied upon judgments of various high courts. In a case involving an examiner appointed by a university, a high court had held that the accused could not be considered to have held an office as an examiner despite his having been a government servant in his capacity as a teacher in a government college.

Earlier in the day, the Central Bureau of Investigation counsel concluded his arguments on framing of charges, stating that there was enough evidence to show that all seven breakaway Janata Dal (Ajit) faction MPs were paid Rs 2 million each hours before the no-confidence motion was put to vote in Parliament on July 28, 1993, at a meeting held in the house of former union minister Ramlakhan Singh Yadav.