The Hindu : National : It’s bribe, not whistle blowing: court

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Thursday, Apr 10, 2008
ePaper | Mobile/PDA Version

National

National

It’s bribe, not whistle blowing: court

J. Venkatesan

“Cash for warrant” an interference with judicial proceedings

Apologise or face consequences, journalist told
No attempt to discredit system: counsel

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Wednesday questioned the bona fides of Vijay Shekar, journalist, and the Zee television channel in conducting a “cash for warrant” sting operation, in which an Ahmedabad magistrate issued warrants against the then President, the then Chief Justice of India and two others.

A Bench comprising Chief Justice K.G. Balakrishnan and Justices R.V. Raveendran and Mukundakam Sharma was hearing Mr. Shekar’s petition contending that his intention was only to expose the malaise in the system.

The warrants against the then President A.P.J. Abdul Kalam, the former Chief Justice of India V.N. Khare, a former Supreme Court judge B.P. Singh and the late R.K. Jain, a senior lawyer, were obtained in the sting operation by Mr. Shekar, who paid Rs. 40,000 to three Ahmedabad-based advocates, who in turn obtained the bailable warrants on the basis of a fictitious complaint.

The court already quashed the warrants issued by magistrate M.S. Brahm Bhatt, holding that the complaint was ex-facie fraud.

On Wednesday, the Chief Justice told senior counsel Arun Jaitley, appearing for the channel and the reporter “if he [journalist] is not prepared to tender an apology, then he should be prepared to face the consequences. It is now found that the magistrate is innocent. You have unnecessarily interfered with judicial proceedings by filing a false complaint. You have no case that the judicial system is corrupt.”

“Positive intent”

Mr. Jaitley said: “It was a positive intent to show whether he is able to manipulate the system and I [reporter] tested it through a lawyer. We regarded it as a whistle blowing exercise and not to discredit the system.”

Justice Sharma intervened: “There is a distinction between a whistle blower and you. You are inducing somebody to commit an offence.”

Justice Raveendran said: “The offence you had committed will not be obliterated by saying you acted bona fide. Can you say that giving a bribe to a lawyer is not an offence? If your action is only to escape contempt then it is not a bona fide action.”

Mr. Jaitley said, “It is not bribe. If it is so, whistle blowers all over the country will be in jail. I was only trying to expose the system. If your intention is bona fide, you don’t ask a while blower to tender an apology or send him to jail.”

At the end of arguments, the Bench posted the matter for final hearing on August 5.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

National