Recently, Supreme Court of India quashed the demand for a probe into alleged bribes paid to political functionaries mentioned in the Birla-Sahara diaries.
The arguments in favor of the probe were undertaken by Father-son, Shanti Bhushan and Prashant Bhushan.
The hearing lasted for about four and half hours and at the end of it the bench of justices dismissed the case as they purported the case to lack any grounds for investigation.
However, the arguments given by the justices seem to be lack weight and are to the point of being flawed.
Arguments doesn’t seem cogent instead
Firstly, the justices argued that the documents presented are loose sheets and therefore bribery charges can’t be made on the basis of them as they were not maintained in regular books of account.
Which organization or a business would maintain bribery charges in books of account? Will any individual or a company formalize the bribery transactions ever?
Secondly, they mentioned that the documents doesn’t point out or indicate that the individual to whom bribes were given did something in exchange for that.
Will any document present an agreement for such a transaction? Are they trying to say there could or should have been some agreement or contract between the parties indulging in bribery?
Thirdly, they also argued that democracy wouldn’t survive if an investigation is conducted against constitution functionaries with these types of evidence.
As if, there are no pending cases against most of the political functionaries.
If they just affirmed to the idea of unbiased investigation what will the ministers lose given they already have many cases pending investigation against them.
Moreover, they also avoided the argument made by the Bhushans about Jain Hawala diary case saying it’s not for them to judge why SC supported that case earlier.
Additionally, they argued that it would open a box of lawsuits, with cases filed from President to Peon.
Sad moment in the judiciary of our country
These arguments not only raises questions about the judgment and integrity of SC but also seems preposterous.
If some documents surface indicating bribery involvement by President or a head of state or any senior political functionary, then an unbiased investigation does no harm and would not only instill the trust of people in the democracy but also prove that legislation is not above judiciary or democracy but this SC judgment seems to be indicating the other way around.
Huh! Lost faith in judiciary too after legislation. Some major changes in the judiciary are sure in order.
Rishank is an MBA guide from NMIMS, currently staying in Mumbai. He likes reading and writing and loves challenging the status quo by voicing his eccentric opinions.
Views presented in the article are those of the author and not of ED.