Supreme Court rejects plea of 14 political parties alleging misuse of central probe agencies

The plea submitted that investigating agencies such as the CBI and the ED are being increasingly deployed in a selective and targeted manner with a view to completely crush political dissent

The plea submitted that investigating agencies such as the CBI and the ED are being increasingly deployed in a selective and targeted manner with a view to completely crush political dissent
The plea submitted that investigating agencies such as the CBI and the ED are being increasingly deployed in a selective and targeted manner with a view to completely crush political dissent

Setback for the opposition, Apex Court refuses to entertain joint plea by 14 parties alleging misuse of probe agencies

On Wednesday the Supreme Court declined to entertain a petition jointly filed by 14 political parties, including the Congress, Trinamool Congress, the AAP, the NCP, and the Shiv Sena-UBT, alleging misuse of probe agencies in arresting opposition leaders, and sought guidelines on the arrest.

A bench headed by Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud and comprising Justice J B Pardiwala observed that political leaders do not enjoy an immunity higher than a common citizen and they are absolutely on the same footing as common citizens, as it questioned how can there be no arrest unless the triple test is satisfied? The political parties sought a fresh set of guidelines governing the arrest and remand.

Senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, representing the political parties, tried very hard to convince the court to change its mind and lay down guidelines for the arrest of the leaders of opposition parties. However, the bench stressed that politicians are citizens and cannot enjoy any higher protection and the aggrieved individual politicians can approach the court concerned for appropriate remedy.

The bench told Singhvi that when political parties argue that there is a chilling effect on the Opposition due to the CBI and ED cases against the leaders of the political parties, then the answer lies in the political space and not in courts.

Chief Justice Chandrachud said general principles of law couldn’t be laid down in the absence of specific facts and added, “We can’t lay down guidelines merely on the basis of some statistics relating to politicians”.

After the detailed hearing in the matter, Singhvi withdrew the petition, which was allowed by the bench.

The political parties sought guidelines to fulfill and realize the guarantee of personal liberty entrenched in Article 21 of the Constitution, for all citizens, including those targeted for exercising their right to political dissent and for performing their duties as the political opposition.

The political parties forming the petitioners are: Congress, DMK, RJD, BRS, Trinamool Congress, AAP, NCP, Shiv Sena-UBT, JMM, JD-U, CPI-M, CPI, Samajwadi Party, J&K National Conference, together representing 45.19 percent of the votes cast in the last State/ UT Assembly Elections, and 42.5 percent of the votes cast in the 2019 General Elections, and holding power in 11 states/ UTs.

The plea said that 14 opposition political parties had filed a petition, in light of the alarming rise in the use of coercive criminal processes against the Opposition political leaders and other citizens exercising their fundamental right to dissent and disagree with the central government.

The plea submitted that investigating agencies such as the CBI and the ED are being increasingly deployed in a selective and targeted manner with a view to completely crush political dissent and upend the fundamental premises of representative democracy. The petition has been drawn and filed by advocate Shadan Farasat.

“As for arrest and remand, the petitioners seek that the triple test (whether a person is a flight risk, or whether there is a reasonable apprehension of the tampering of evidence, or of the influencing/ intimidation of witnesses) be used by police officers/ ED officials and courts alike for the arrest of persons in any cognizable offences except those involving serious bodily violence. Where these conditions are not satisfied, alternatives like an interrogation at fixed hours or at most house arrest be used to meet the demands of investigation,” added the plea.

[With Inputs from IANS]

PGurus is now on Telegram. Click here to join our channel and stay updated with all the latest news and views

For all the latest updates, download PGurus App.

1 COMMENT

  1. Is the clout of highly paid legal eagles on the decline in the sphere of discrimination? The plea looked more like a demand for 5 star treatment in investigation. Political opposition, fundamental right to decent and disagreement with the government are different from involvement in criminal activities. 45.19 pct vote share for or against has no relevance since a law passed by more than 90% was turned down in the recent past. The time has come to treat the financial corruption on par with murder, which is what it results in an indirect way, taking away the livelihood of millions. Just as the burden of proof has been reversed the concept of allowing 100 guilty to go scot-free to save one innocent needs a balanced re-look given the number of criminals going scot-free.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here