In quashing the assets case against Mayawati, the Supreme Court seems to have ignored its earlier orders to CBI
The Supreme Court order quashing the Central Bureau of Investigation’s FIR in the assets case against former Uttar Pradesh chief minister, Mayawati, has come as a jolt. Yes, the Supreme Court’s order is binding and must be respected but, equally, it is important to record honest opinions on such an important matter that affects the fight against corruption in high places. The order was based on technical grounds which, in the view of many, are untenable.
Decidedly, the CBI stepped into the matter over allegations against Ms Mayawati relating to the Taj Heritage Corridor Project under the directions of the Supreme Court.
First, the CBI was asked to enquire and submit a preliminary report. It did this in two phases, upon which the Supreme Court directed the agency on September 18, 2003 to lodge an FIR and investigate Ms Mayawati, then chief minister, and Nadeemuddin Siddiqui, former minister for environment, U.P. and other officers involved; On October 5, 2003, the CBI registered two cases, No. 18 relating to the Taj Corridor and No. 19 under Section 13(I)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, for possession of disproportionate assets.
Sanction declined
The charge sheet filed by the CBI in the Court in the Taj Corridor case, however, failed. The U.P. Governor declined sanction for prosecution under Section 197 CrPC and Section 19(1) of the PCA on the grounds that, “no prima facie case to charge Ms Mayawati with the offences … [was made out]. There was no forgery either. There was also no element of corruption on her part.”
This immediately raises the question whether the power of according sanction should continue to be vested in a political authority, or even the Governor, who is an appointee of the ruling party at the Centre. Consequently, the Special Judge refused to take cognisance, which was not challenged by the CBI, not surprisingly because, again, the power to challenge such an order lies with the Law Ministry of the Government of India and not the CBI.
As for the assets case, Ms Mayawati challenged FIR No. 19 before the Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench, which disposed of the matter on October 22, 2003 with the direction that the petitioner will not be arrested until the conclusion of the investigation into the allegations. There was, however, no order questioning the jurisdiction of the CBI. Any agency would take the order as a go-ahead for investigation into the allegation.
The Supreme Court also, at the very initial stage through its order on August 21, 2003 in M.C. Mehta v. Union of India in the Taj case, asked the CBI to verify “their assets because it was alleged that an amount of Rs. 17 crores was released without sanction”. Thus, though not specifically against Ms Mayawati in a separate case, there was an order, for verification of “assets.”
It is thus not correct that the CBI, out of the blue, began investigating the assets case against her. Further, when the status reports for both FIRs, 18 and 19, were filed before the Supreme Court, the court issued directions on July 19, 2004 in M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, permitting the CBI eight weeks time to complete investigations in the Taj Corridor case, also adding: “As far as FIR No. RC 0062003A0019 is concerned, three months’ time is granted.”
In other words, the CBI was allowed to proceed with the investigation in the assets case as well. Assertions by the court regarding the absence of a link between the two cases, and that it would not monitor the assets case also indicated that it was cognisant of investigation into two separate cases. For five years thereafter, Ms Mayawati chose not to raise any objection regarding the assets case and filed the present separate writ only in 2008. And on July 6, 2012, the court struck down the FIR in the assets case on the ground that it was without jurisdiction and that the CBI investigation was illegal.
The bottom line
What, in any case, is the bottom line here? The court, undoubtedly, asked the CBI on September 18, 2003 to lodge an FIR into allegations of corruption against some top functionaries of the State, including Ms Mayawati, a minister of her government, and other officials. The order was related to the Taj Corridor, but on the basis of preliminary enquiries conducted by the agency, it registered a case on the same day against Ms Mayawati specifically with respect to offences under Section 13(1)(e) of the P.C. Act, for possession of disproportionate assets. Subsection (e) was provided in the P.C. Act, our stand goes, so that if specific charges of corruption like accepting bribe, showing favour, illegally causing gain to himself and others and a loss to the public exchequer, etc., under Sections 13(1)‘ a,’ ‘b,’ ‘c,’ or ‘d’, failed, a public servant could still be hauled up if he or she was found with disproportionate assets that, under the law, would be presumed to be acquired through illegal/corrupt means.
It is for this reason that quite often, the CBI has registered and investigated cases of disproportionate assets against public servants as offshoots of specific corruption cases.
In this case, the CBI contended that preliminary enquiries in the Taj Corridor case led it to discover these assets, and hence the case and investigation into the assets. The court called it “a roving enquiry into assets.” With respect, it may be said that all enquiries into the acquisition of disproportionate assets, by their very nature, have to be “roving.”
According to the CBI, her assets increased fifty-fold, from Rs. 1 crore in 2003 to Rs. 50 crore in 2007. By Ms Mayawati’s own estimates, her wealth is worth Rs 111.64 crore, as mentioned in an affidavit filed along with her Rajya Sabha nomination papers. This is not to say that the charges are true or that she is guilty of the offence. But why quash the FIR, why nullify the investigation done so far, and stall the due process of law, including trial by the competent court, to determine guilt or innocence? One may recall that in the Bofors case too, the FIR was quashed by the Delhi High Court. And the prolonged litigation from High Court to Supreme Court and back had something to do with the not-so-successful investigation in the Bofors case, if I may humbly say.
Perhaps with the exception of the Left parties, the reaction of political parties to the order of the Supreme Court, across the board, was more to do with politics than with public interest. The Congress, not surprisingly, tended to take a soft line, in keeping with its hat trick of procuring support from the two warring rivals of U.P. No surprise too that the Samajwadi Party highlighted that the order was no exoneration of Ms Mayawati. The BJP was back to accusing the Congress for using the CBI as its tool, showing no concern for the setback to the fight against corruption, or repeated denigration of the CBI, premier investigating agency of the country.
Two imperatives emerge from above: One, the CBI must file a review petition in the Supreme Court against the order; and, two, no time must be lost in creating the institutions of Lokpal at the Centre and Lokayukats in the States, vested with the authority to oversee investigation of all cases against political functionaries and top bureaucrats, with powers to accord sanction for prosecution under CrPC/PCAct and other relevant laws.
(N.K. Singh is a former Joint Director, CBI, who retired as Director General Bureau of Police Research & Development.)
Supreme court has just followed, what the law is.CBI can't proceed with any investigation without state's consent.Here Supreme court can not be blamed.The problem lies in the law.As is correctly mentioned by the writer,Lokpal should be implemented as soon as possible so that a power above the politics will be there to tackle cases like these.
There was a reason our constitution makers kept the "Judiciary" aside, It was designed this way so as to be the well wisher of the people and keep an eye on the constitution. Rejecting a petition clearly on technical grounds was not expected from the apex court . If everything was to be done this way then why also keep the judicial review. Such acts will only encourage our corrupt Parliamentarians and bureaucrats.
Faith in our judiciary is diminishing day by day case by case and the CBI bearing a double brunt.
Thw writer has very aptly explained the factual position relating to the
factual position on which the CBI was proceeding in the DA case against
Mayawati. The SC quashing this particular move is extremely demoralising
for the Indian people at large and the CBI in particular. As suggested
at the end of the article, the CBI must file a review petition and do it
without wasting any time.
Quashing of an FIR while investigation is still incomplete (or has not even started) is said to be an extremely rare thing. A lot of cases filed to harass people remain in the "investigation stage" for many many years because there is nothing to investigate but the sponsor of the police case wants the case to be kept alive to keep the victim in throes. Will this case's verdict now set up a precedent ? In certain cases like false criminal cases filed on whistleblowers, criminal defamation cases etc it makes sense to quash FIRs as soon as it can be seen that it is a form of harassment through police process.
This is what India has come to be.
I somehow have a suspicion, this SC order has a direct link to
Mayawati's support gathered by Centre for Presidential elections.
Very well, see where the country is heading.
SC passes stringent orders on Bellari mining scam, keeps mum on goa
mining scam, squashes CBI investigations against Mayawati just before
presidential elections, pulls up Guj government for godhra riot cases,
allows bail for Sajjan kumar in 84 delhi riot cases.
we had long known CBI as team B of centre, very soon SC would become
team C.
Got to love India's sham of a democracy.
One of the best articles i came across recently in hindu.It shows how
important lokpal is for common people,if there has been lokpal then
definately mayawati woul be behind the bars.Depravity on our political
system,our law seems esoteric in protecting these crooks.
May be the majority of people of the country are not aware of laws. But they are watching mutely watching. The working of judiciary is totally on technical grounds. Which says that if a crime takes place and no proof established against the convict he/she sets free. This seems that nothing has happened.
But in reality technical ground says every action has cause and every cause had an action.
They should do something technically to do justice and prevent justice against influential Personalities.
This type of practice will definitely call A Revolutionary Change in the Country. May be rivers of blood will flow. Please can any body save this falling judiciary, legislature and executive in the largest democracy worldwide.
Thank you Mr Singh for a factual and incisive analysis of this
important case, which could set a precedent for similar other cases.
May you inspire others in Indian public service to follow your
example.
To uphold the laws of the country:
(1) “the CBI must file a review petition in the Supreme Court against
the order”
In the interests of justice and fair play for the citizens of India
AND to safeguard the reputation of the apex court of the land AND to
avoid state sponsored anarchy, as a matter of urgency, the following
must be established:
(2) “institutions of Lokpal at the Centre and Lokayukats in the
States, vested with the authority to oversee investigation of all
cases against political functionaries and top bureaucrats, with powers
to accord sanction for prosecution under CrPC/PCAct and other relevant
laws”
(3) an independent Judicial Conduct Commission to deliver transparent
judicial accountability.
This was no surprise and was expected by looking at the present situation in India. I had some faith on Supreme court after the 2G case but now i doubt that the judgements by the apex court are not influenced by our great neta's. Not only Mayawati all these great personalities ruling India have enough wealth for their next 5 generations atleast.
Sir,
This is the prelude so that 2G scam, Aadarsh scam,enquries, supreme
court's judgement will be just an eyewash and everyone will go scotfree.
We in India, once punished all the evil doers to uphold Dharma, but now
loved to protect evildoers at any cost
apropos to the lead on the order of supreme court to cbi in favor of quashing the fir against ms.mayavati highlights the systemic inabilities of Indian judiciary in present context.we are aware of the thousand cases languishing in courts for decades together,such measures on part of supreme court to dissuade honest investigations by cbi will definitely cause harm to fight against corruption and will weaken public faith in righteousness of judiciary.judicial reforms is the need of the hour.
Well written piece by N K Singh in the Hindu about letting off Mayawati from criminal cases by the Supreme Court. It is amazing that our judciary dispose off the matter of serious nature citing technical reasons and on the other hand goes beyond its jurisdiction and shows extra enthusiasm in taking up public interest matter as if the SC has all powers to rule the country and instead of intrepreting the law it goes beyond and directs executive , surpassing its jurisdiction like the cases of interlinking rivers and Vodafone! The SC must see the reasonings in disposing off case in accordance with law. Once again the Mayawati case has exposed the weaknesses in the SC to interpret laws! N K Singh has rightly advised the CBI to move for review petition in the case but the ruling elite, which is controlling CBI to serve its own interest will allow the CBI to file review petition?This is India and its judiciary and politicians can do no wrong!
Indira Gandhi was accused of manipulating and interfering with the higher judiciary in the pre-Emergency days. For instance, seniority was ignored while appointing CJI. There was also a strong rumour, supported by some happenings, that CJI had issued a secret order that no SLP against the government was to be admitted, all were to be dismissed at the admission stage itself. Is our country going back to those days?
The Law, the Supreme court etc are only a symbolism for the morals of this country. India is a country with crazy wealth and yet crazy number of almost dying poors. Frankly, I don't really care how many crores minister of a state has made and by which means because people of that same state are electing the same thing again and again. I am paying my taxes, have always been. Wake me up when the majority has belief in anarchy, and not this crazy incarnation of multi-party system.
Issue is that we want to be richer rather than just rich. Disproportionate assets could be controlled had we went the marxist way, or communist way... but even the proponents couldn't help the dictatorship of proletriat. Emotions of Mr N K Singh must be taken cognigence of, but not by court, but by people.
Although I see grim not in court's ruling, but in society's absolutely fanatical obsession for being rich, and getting away with it... hailing quantity, doomed be the quality.
The resolute silence of both major national parties in the matter of corruption cases that leaders of regional powers repeatedly find themselves caught in points to two tragic realities- first, that there is no party which is remotely 'clean' enough itself to vociferously protest the wrong-doings of rival camps, and second, the greed for power and the hope to win elections with the help of smaller parties make them willingly overlook the gravest misappropriation of public funds. No wonder then that not a single party is willing to work seriously towards a strong Lokpal Bill.
Thank you Mr Singh for a factual, lucid and incisive analysis of this
watershed case. May you inspire others in Indian public service to
follow your example.
To uphold the law of the country:
(1) “the CBI must file a review petition in the Supreme Court against
the order”
In the interests of justice and fair play for the citizens of India
AND to safeguard the reputation of the apex court of the land AND to
avoid state sponsored anarchy, as a matter of urgency, the following
must be established:
(2) “institutions of Lokpal at the Centre and Lokayukats in the
States, vested with the authority to oversee investigation of all
cases against political functionaries and top bureaucrats, with powers
to accord sanction for prosecution under CrPC/PCAct and other relevant
laws”
(3) an independent Judicial Conduct Commission to deliver transparent
judicial accountability.
Horrendous..!! This act of supreme court has created a kind of fear
that, the nation's highest judicial body has gone for a toss and for
everybody's surprise the justice has definitely been pulverized.God save
this country.
It is shame on world`s largest democracy. It is a clear evidence of the
investigating agencies bias towards the ruling parties. It is even
shame on the part of Supreme court. Many a time supreme court spoke
about the respect we show to courts. If this is the case the courts
shall never own their respect. There is a serious suspicion that the
political body and the legal body going together.If it can order
investigation against the mining barons why do it leave this in open
air. Is this because the culprit supporting the ruling party at the
center or the partial fund diversification...? Even a new born kid
speaks about the assets of this country`s politicians. It is the sad
plight of the investigating agency to follow the paved path.
The supreme court has proven that it is not a mute spectator in the
corruption in the 2G scam, now it is its turn reciprocate it again.
It seems that the CBI has often been used to give quasi-legal
embodiment to the desires of the ruling party which in turn wishes to
use it to either persecute its political opponents or to buy time to
tide over an unfavorable phase. By quasi legal I mean 'loaded with
legal flaws or loop holes' which can be later used as escape routes
needed by the ruling party. The timing of these cases reaching the
High court or the Supreme Court is carefully regulated by the ruling
party as the ruling of the courts (which move on strictly legal
grounds where as the cases are deliberately prepared quasi legally) is
already known and desired by the ruling party. So, blaming the apex
courts is not very apt. However, raising questions about the puppet
nature of the apex investigative body is most certainly the need of
the day.
Your paper is the only one to pursue this matter after your editorial on the Supreme Court order. This article by Mr N.K.Singh is quite revealing. But one can suppose that with the political equations between the UPA and the BSP, we have to wait and see if the CBI appeals to the Supreme Court for a review of the judgement'
We have almost accepted that politicians will make money. The common man has to helplessly watch the assets of the politicians grow every passing day. The Supreme Court has also realized this perhaps! Unfortunately, however, we have still not got hand to a process of law to book the guilty politicians and seize their ill-gotten wealth and assets abroad. We have been debating appointment of an ombudsman or a Lokpal to expeditiously deal with cases of corruption. But no progress has been made as ultimately the politicians will decide whether to punish the guilty at all. This is a great tragedy of our democracy.
Absolute shame on our Govt & its 'poor' administration; even the highest court seems to favor them for illogical reasons unacceptable- God alone can help us to get rid of this autocratic family rule and prevent their chamchas chelas away ! Pity
Please Email the Editor