Eminent people dare SC to book them for contempt too

Eminent people dare SC to book them for contempt too

NEW DELHI: Twenty-five citizens, including eminent persons, on Tuesday moved the Supreme Court daring it to initiate contempt proceedings against them as they were expressing solidarity with advocates Prashant and Shanti Bhushan, who had alleged that eight of the 16 former Chief Justices of India (CJIs) were corrupt.

The applicants included RTI activist Arvind Kejriwal, social activist Aruna Roy, National Advisory Council (NAC) member Harsh Mander, former IIM Ahmedabad director-in-charge Prof Jagdeep S Chhokar, Magsaysay Award winner Rajendra Singh, former IFS officer and social activist Madhu Bhaduri, JNU's professor emeritus Amit Bhaduri, former West Bengal additional chief secretary Kalyani Chaudhuri and social activist Madhu Kishwar.

Others included professionals ranging from engineers, journalists, RTI activists, a major general and an educationist. Appearing for them, senior advocate Vikas Singh requested a Bench comprising Justices Altamas Kabir, Cyriac Joseph and H L Dattu that they be made parties in the contempt proceedings drawn against Prashant Bhushan for his views about corruption in judiciary published in a weekly magazine last year. With so many eminent persons seeking to be respondents in the case, the bench refused to take up the application.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Eminent-people-dare-SC-to-book-them-for-contempt-too/articleshow/7062743.cms#ixzz17T4nY8T8

Nothing moves without money, Legalise corruption - SC

Nothing moves without money, Legalise corruption - SC

The Supreme Court has expressed concern over growing corruption in the government machinery, particularly in the income tax, sales tax and excise departments, saying “ nothing moves without money”. “It is very unfortunate that there is no control over corruption in the country. There is rampant

corruption, particularly in the department of income tax, sales tax and excise department. Nothing moves without money,” a Bench of Justices Markandeya Katju and T.S. Thakur said.

The apex court was admitting an appeal filed by the CBI challenging the acquittal of an income tax inspector, Mohanlal Sharma, by the Punjab and Haryana High Court.

Additional Solicitor General P.P. Malhotra, appearing for the CBI, submitted that Sharma was acquitted by the high court despite the trial court holding him guilty of demanding and accepting a bribe of R10,000 from an IT assessee. He was earlier sentenced to one year’s rigorous imprisonment by the trial court.

The bench said “why doesn’t the government legalise corruption so that a specific amount is fixed for every case... That way, every individual will know how much bribe he has to pay.”

It added sarcastically, “Poor government officials, we can’t blame them also because of the growing inflation.”

Sharma, who appeared in person, denied the allegation and said he was falsely implicated.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/Nothing-moves-without-money-SC/H1-Article1-610994.aspx

Cash-for-query scam: Delhi high court quashes charges against journalists

Cash-for-query case: HC reprieve for journos

24 sep 2010

New Delhi: Defending sting operation as a means to expose corruption, the Delhi High Court today quashed criminal proceedings against two journalists who unearthed the cash-for-query scam involving MPs in 2005, giving a boost to investigative journalism.

Observing that corruption in the country has now taken "deep roots", the court also said that acting as "agent provocateurs" to expose graft at higher level does not amount to abetting this crime.

Giving reprieve to Mr Anirudh Bahal and Ms Suhasini Raj, Justice S.N. Dhingra set aside the trial court order of July six, 2009 taking cognisance of the chargesheet filed by the Delhi police against the two investigative journalists.

The court also slammed the Delhi police for its handling of the sensational scam, saying it seems to have "acted as 'his master's voice' of the persons in power"

Both Mr Bahal and Ms Raj, reporters from website CobraPost.com, had challenged a summoning order issued by a Special Judge in connection with the sting in which 11 MPs from different political parties were caught on camera accepting bribes for raising and tabling questions in Parliament in December 2005.

The expose 'Operation Duryodhan' was shown on Aajtak news channel. The inquiry committee of both the Houses of Parliament had recommended the expulsion of the MPs — 10 from Lok Sabha and one from Rajya Sabha.

"I consider that in order to expose corruption at higher level and to show to what extent the State managers are corrupt, acting as agent provocateurs does not amount to committing a crime," Justice Dhingra said.

"Charging the petitioners under Prevention of Corruption Act would amount to discouraging the people of this country from performing their duties enjoined upon them by the Constitution as well as the Criminal Procedure Code," the court said.

"I consider that it is built-in fundamental duties that every citizen must strive for a corruption-free society and must expose the corruption whenever it comes to his or her knowledge and try to remove corruption at all levels more so at higher levels of management of the State," it added.

The Delhi police had registered an FIR against the two journalists for abetting the crime of giving bribes for MPs for raising questions in the Parliament.

"The corruption in this country has now taken deep roots. Chanakaya in his famous work Arthshastra advised and suggested that honesty of even judges should be periodically tested by the agent provocateurs," Justaice Dhingra said.

Justifying the mode of operation adopted by the journalists to expose the scam, the judge at another point again said that citizens can act as agent provocateurs to bring out and expose and uproot the corruption.

The court dismissed the contention of the police that the journalists should have informed it about the scam and it would have taken action against the corrupt MPs saying that it is well known what is the fate of whistle blowers in the country.

http://www.deccanchronicle.com/node/182871

---

More @

http://www.deccanherald.com/content/99173/hc-quashes-charges-against-journalists.html

HC quashes charges against journalists in cash-for-query scam

New Delhi, Sep 24 (PTI)

The Delhi High Court today quashed charges against two journalists for carrying out a sting operation against the then legislators for allegedly demanding money to ask questions in Parliament in 2005.

Justice S N Dhingra quashed the trial court order of July six, 2009 of taking cognisance of the chargesheet filed against the two journalists Anirudh Bahal and Suhasini Raj.
"Charging the petitioners under Prevention of Corruption Act would amount to discouraging the people of this country from performing their duties enjoined upon them by the Constitution as well as the Criminal Procedure Code," the court said.
Both the journalists, reporters from website Cobra Post.com, had challenged a summoning order issued by a Special Judge after taking cognisance of the chargesheet filed against them along with the tainted MPs by Delhi Police.

The court had on September 17 reserved its order on the petition of the journalists, who conducted sting operation to highlight the cash-for-query scam involving 11 MPs of different political parties.
During the arguments, Delhi Police's counsel had justified the initiation of proceedings against Bahal and Raj contending they had offered money to the then parliamentarians which was an encouragement to corruption.However, the argument was countered by the counsel for the reporters who had submitted that if the money had not been offered to the MPs, the sting operation would not have been conducted.
Eleven MPs were caught on camera accepting bribes for raising and tabling questions in Parliament in December 2005.The inquiry committee of both the Houses of Parliament had recommended the expulsion of the 11 MPs- ten from Lok Sabha and one from Rajya Sabha.
The police, on the recommendations of the parliamentary committee, registered FIRs against the reporters and probed the role of the middleman in the sting operation.
The FIR was filed under sections 12 and 13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act and section 120 B (Conspiracy) of the Indian Penal Code.
The reporters had then approached the High Court seeking to quash the proceedings against them, alleging that the police were shielding the corrupt MPs and framing them in the case instead.
Following a chargesheet by the specialised Crime Branch of the Delhi Police, Special Judge Rakesh Siddharth had summoned the reporters as well as the MPs.
The proceedings against the MPs would continue for the time being before the Special court.

 

-----

 

Cash-for-query scam: Delhi high court quashes charges against journalists

In a reprieve for two investigative journalists, the Delhi high court today quashed charges against them for conducting a sting operation to expose the cash-for-query scam involving Members of Parliament in 2005.

Justice SN Dhingra set aside the trial court order of July 6, 2009 taking cognisance of the charge sheet filed against the two journalists - Anirudh Bahal and Suhasini Raj - by the Delhi police.

"Charging the petitioners under Prevention of Corruption Act would amount to discouraging the people of this country from performing their duties enjoined upon them by the Constitution as well as the Criminal Procedure Code," the court said.

Both Bahal and Raj, reporters from website Cobra Post.com, had challenged a summoning order issued by a special judge after taking cognisance of the chargesheet filed against them along with the tainted MPs by the Delhi police.

The court had on September 17 reserved its order on the petition of the journalists, who conducted the sting in which 11 MPs from different political parties were caught on camera accepting bribes for raising and tabling questions in Parliament in December 2005. The expose 'Operation Duryodhan' was shown on Aajtak news channel.

The inquiry committee of both the Houses of Parliament had recommended the expulsion of the MPs--ten from Lok Sabha and one from Rajya Sabha.

During the arguments, Delhi police's counsel had justified the initiation of proceedings against Bahal and Raj contending they had offered money to the then parliamentarians which was an encouragement to corruption.

However, the argument was countered by the counsel for the reporters who had submitted that if the money had not been offered to the MPs, the sting operation would not have been conducted.

The police, on the recommendations of the parliamentary committee, registered FIRs against the reporters and probed the role of the middleman in the sting operation.

The FIR was filed under sections 12 and 13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act and section 120 B (Conspiracy) of the Indian Penal Code.

The reporters had then approached the high court seeking to quash the proceedings against them, alleging that the police were shielding the corrupt MPs and framing them in the case instead.

Following a charge sheet by the specialised Crime Branch of the Delhi police, special judge Rakesh Siddharth had summoned the reporters as well as the MPs.

The proceedings against the MPs would continue for the time being before the special court.

http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_cash-for-query-scam-delhi-high-court-quashes-charges-against-journalists_1442395

Cannot allow HC writ recourse in corruption cases: Delhi High Court

Cannot allow HC writ recourse in corruption cases: Court

New Delhi 1,400 Corruption cases pending in the Delhi courts at present

While other doors are already shut on the city’s government officials trying to get FIRs in corruption cases slapped against them quashed, there is something more worrisome that may permanently close their option of moving the Delhi High Court by filing writ petitions — the only remedy left with them as on date.

Noting that the High Court should not entertain writ petitions filed by public servants who opt to challenge the orders of the special courts’ framing penal charges against them, a single judge bench of the Delhi High Court has sent the question to the Chief Justice to settle the matter.

An adverse order would also mean no more stays on the trials at the lower courts, where corruption cases lingering for decades is more a norm than an exception. Seized of over 30 petitions on the same issue, Justice S N Dhingra was of unequivocal opinion that when the High Court had already restrained the accused from challenging the lower courts’ orders under other legal provisions, they should not be allowed to do so by invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of the court by way of writs.

According to Justice Dhingra, it was understood that the accused could not raise grievances against the framing of charges under Section 482 of the CrPC that gave the High Court “inherent powers” to pass orders to secure the ends of justice. Similarly, the revision petition was also not maintainable under the law. The High Court, therefore, should not let the accused take steps indirectly which could not be taken directly.

“The legislative intent, as expressed by the Prevention of Corruption Act, for speedier disposal of corruption cases cannot be allowed to be defeated by opening a back-door entry to the litigants for assailing orders on charge under the Constitution’s Article 227 (Power of superintendence over all courts by the High Court). It is evident from the fact that more than 30 petitions were initially filed as revision petitions but converted to writ petitions later by the order of the court. This shows that since the revision against order on charge was barred by statute, the court opened another door for doing what could not have been done by the petitioners due to the statutory prohibition,” noted Justice Dhingra.

The remedy of writs, according to the judge, was limited to ensure that trial courts did not overstep their authority, but it could not be stretched to examining evidence against the accused. Also, such petitions should not be entertained in view of the fact that corruption cases stretch for decades, the judge added.

“It is well-known that trials in corruption cases are not permitted to proceed easily and they take anything up to 20 years. One important reason for this is that the moment a charge is framed, every trial lands in the High Court and the order on charge is invariably assailed by litigants. The High Court, being flooded with such revision petitions, would take years deciding the revision petitions,” he observed.

Since there were two different views on the subject by two judges of the Delhi High Court, Justice Dhingra posted the question to Chief Justice Dipak Misra for referring it to a larger Bench. He, however, made it clear that there would be no stay of proceedings before the trial court in any of the cases.

http://www.expressindia.com/latest-news/cannot-allow-hc-writ-recourse-in-corruption-cases-court/684063/

Eight of 16 CJIs were 'corrupt': Ex-law min

Eight of 16 CJIs were 'corrupt': Ex-law min

New Delhi, September 16, 2010

Former Union Law Minister Shanti Bhushan on Thursday told the Supreme Court that at least eight of the 16 chief justices of India (CJIs) were "definitely corrupt". In an affidavit filed on Thursday, senior counsel Shanti Bhushan said that six of the CJIs were "definitely honest" and he could not comment on the remaining two judges. 

The senior counsel sought to be impleaded in a case in which his son Prashant Bhushan is facing contempt proceedings. 

Sixteen CJIs that Shanti Bhushan has mentioned in his affidavit are: Justice Rangnath Mishra, Justice K N Singh, Justice M H Kaina, Justice L M Sharma, Justice M N Venkatachalliah, Justice A M Ahemadi, Justice J S Verma, Justice M M Punchhi, Justice A S Anand, Justice S P Bharucha, Justice B N Kirpal, Justice G B Pathak, Justice Rajendra Babu, Justice R C Lohati, Justice V N Khare and Justice Y K Sabharwal.

Shanti Bhushan in his affidavit said that two former CJIs had personally told him that their immediate predecessors and immediate successors were corrupt judges.

He said that the names of those four CJIs were included in the list of eight corrupt CJIs.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/Eight-of-16-CJIs-were-corrupt-Ex-law-min/Article1-600823.aspx

Delhi high court says corrupt central servants can be punished after retirement

Delhi high court says corrupt central servants can be punished after retirement

8 sep 2010

Sending out a clear message to the corrupt, the Delhi high court (HC) ruled on Tuesday that tainted government officials cannot escape punishment even after retirement.

HC said corruption should be accountable at all stages and officials involved should face the consequences.

A division bench of justices Pradeep Nandrajog and MC Garg upheld the Centre’s decision to deduct 50% of pension of HL Gulati, who retired as a senior accounts officer in the ministry of defence.

“The charges proved against the respondent [Gulati] go to show that his conduct tantamounts to unlawful behavior by a public servant in relation to his duties willfully. Thus, he is certainly guilty of committing misconduct in office. Looking at the amount involved, it can certainly be said to be a case of grave misconduct,” the judges said.

HC was hearing the Centre’s plea against a central administrative tribunal order quashing its decision of deducting Gulati’s pension. “The order passed by the tribunal is not sustainable in law,” HC said.

Gulati authorised payment against 36 fraudulent claims to the tune of Rs42.24 lakh approximately, Jyoti Singh, counsel for the government, argued.

“Acts of moral turpitude, of dishonesty, bribery and corruption would obviously be an aggravated form of misconduct, not only because of their morally depraving nature but even the reason that they would be attracting penal laws. Failure to maintain devotion to duty would be like fireman sleeping in the fire office and not responding to an emergency call, ultimately resulting in the death of 10 persons,” HC observed.

http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_delhi-high-court-says-corrupt-central-servants-can-be-punished-after-retirement_1435008

HC rebukes CBI for 17-year-probe in a graft case - Corrupt can go scot free by giving bribe: Court More at : Corrupt can go scot free by giving bribe

Quoting a saying that “if your are caught taking bribe, you can go scot free by giving bribe”, the Delhi High Court on Monday charged the Central Bureau of Investigation with doing the same in a corruption case in which the agency took 17 long years to investigate a case against an executive engineer of then Delhi Electricity Supply Undertaking (DESU).

The engineer has since taken voluntary retirement.

A team of the investigating agency had caught the engineer, A.K. Gupta, red-handed at his office on a complaint by a man from whom Gupta had demanded a bribe to process some work in 1990.

After as many as eleven years of the incident, the CBI filed a report in a special court here seeking closure of the case against Gupta. However, the Special Judge rejected its plea in 2002. Thereafter, the country’s premier investigating agency filed a charge-sheet in the case after seven years in February, 2009.

Justice S.N. Dhingra made the observation while dismissing a petition by the engineer seeking quashing of the charge-sheet on the ground of the undue delay, first in investigating the case and then charge-sheeting the accused.

Concurring with the plea of the accused that speedy investigation and speedier trial is the right of an accused, Justice Dhingra said but fast and fair investigation is also a right of Society, being the victim of crime.

Commenting on the role of the investigating agency in the case, Justice Dhingra said: ``There is an apparent connivance between the petitioner and the CBI officials.’’

In a trap case, where a person is caught red-handed, the investigation to be done involves only recording of statements of witnesses to the trap, of the complainant, seizure of the bribe amount and forensic examination of the hand wash of the accused,’’ Justice Dhingra further observed.

The Court was also surprised over the investigating agency giving no explanation of the delay of 17 years. It inferred that the agency was not at all interested in bringing to book corrupt officials holding public offices.

Dismissing the petition of the engineer, Justice Dhingra asked the CBI director to fix responsibility for the delay and action taken against the responsible officials. It asked the director to complete the investigation in three months and a file an action taken report in the Court.

http://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/Delhi/article574375.ece

….

New Delhi, Aug 16 (IANS) “In this country, if you are caught taking bribe, you can go scot-free by giving bribe,” the Delhi High Court said Monday, pulling up the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) for delay in probing a two-decade-old graft case.
The court pulled up the CBI for delaying the investigation in the case, which involves a Delhi power utility engineer, saying that the agency’s work was not up to the mark.

Justice S.N. Dhingra said: “The people of this country have a vested right to ensure that officers working in public offices should be honest and persons with integrity and those who indulge in corruption should be brought to book.”

The court also directed the CBI chief to investigate as to who were responsible for the delay in the case and what action has been taken against errant officials.

The court dismissed the plea by A.K. Gupta, who was accused of taking bribe in 1990 when he was working as engineer in Delhi’s electricity department, to close the case against him. Gupta was caught red-handed by the CBI.

“The CBI had no explanation as to why the result of investigation was not filed for all these years,” the judge observed.

In 2004, the CBI filed a closure report in the trial court, which rejected it saying that the reasons given in the report were flimsy, unconvincing and vague.

It was found that the CBI had not investigated the case properly and had unnecessarily doubted the credibility of the complainant.

In 2002, the CBI filed a chargesheet in the court which took cognisance of the same in 2009. Gupta then approached the court seeking quashing of the chargesheet on the ground of delay.

In his petition, he stated that speedy investigation and trial was his right. He said some witnesses whom he could have examined in his defence had retired and it would be impossible for the petitioner to trace them now.

Pulling up the CBI for delaying the investigation, the court said: “The entire investigation does not take more than two months as the accused was caught red handed and the agency has to record only the statements of witnesses involved in the trap.”

“It seems that the CBI was not at all interested that the corrupt officials sitting in the public offices should be brought to book,” the court said.

“Even if the CBI had to file a closure report doubting the credibility of the complainant and other witnesses, it could have filed the same within a reasonable time,” the court said.

“Perhaps, the CBI wanted that the case should die a slow unnatural death that is why for 11 years it kept sitting on this investigation and then filed a closure report giving lame excuses,” the court said.

http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/uncategorized/corrupt-can-go-scot-free-by-giving-bribe-court_100413254.html#ixzz0wngeUkRC