The plea alleged there has been an alarming rise in the use of coercive criminal processes against opposition political leaders and other citizens exercising their fundamental right to dissent.
Observing that politicians do not have 바카라higher immunity바카라, the Supreme Court Wednesday refused to entertain a plea by 14 political parties led by the Congress alleging arbitrary use of central probe agencies against opposition leaders, asserting that laying down guidelines without facts of a criminal case will be a 바카라very dangerous바카라 proposition.
A bench of Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud and Justice J B Pardiwala expressed disinclination to entertain the petition, saying courts are always there for taking up the grievances of political leaders as they do for common citizens.
바카라I think that in the absence of the specific fact, for us to lay down the general principle of law is again a very dangerous proposition. Once we have the facts in a case or group of cases then we can lay down law not just for that case but as a general principle,바카라 said the CJI while refusing to entertain the plea.
바카라The difficulty in your petition is that you are trying to extrapolate the statistics into binding legal guidelines which effectively would apply. You are aware of the fact these statistics pertain only to politicians. At the same time you are aware of the fact that the guidelines cannot apply only to the politicians. Politicians do not have higher immunity,바카라 the bench said.
Sensing its disinclination, senior advocate A M Sighvi, appearing for the political parties, sought permission to withdraw the petition which was granted.
바카라Learned counsel seeks permission to withdraw the plea at this stage. The petition is accordingly dismissed as withdrawn,바카라 the bench ordered.
The bench said it is always willing to take up 바카라a single case or a group of cases바카라 where a political leader has been targeted to silence the voice.
바카라Come to us with one or more cases together we will certainly deal with this,바카라 the bench said.
It said the remedy to the allegation that the space for political opponents has shrunk lies in the 바카라political space바카라 itself and not in courts.
The top court was not in agreement with the submission that in cases which do not relate to bodily injuries and provide for a sentence of not more than seven years pre and post-arrest guidelines needed to be framed.
For arrest and remand, the political parties have been seeking adherence to the triple test which deals with the 바카라determination as to whether a person is a flight risk, whether there is a reasonable apprehension of the tampering of evidence, or the influencing/intimidation of witnesses바카라.
At the outset, Singhvi referred to certain statistics while trying to drive home the point that opposition leaders have been targeted by federal investigative agencies from 2014 to 2022 and that there has been a 600 per cent increase in CBI and ED cases.
바카라Between 2014 and 2022, 121 political leaders have been probed by the Enforcement Directorate out of whom 95 per cent are from opposition parties,바카라 he claimed.
The Narendra Modi government first came to power in May 2014.
The CBI has probed 124 political leaders and out of these, 108 are from opposition political parties, Singhvi claimed.
The bench observed, by and large, the conviction rate in India is 바카라abysmally low바카라 and asked whether it can say there should not be any investigation keeping in mind the statistics.
바카라Your statistics are there and there is no question with that...this is the petition filed by 14 political parties. Now you give us some statistics and can we therefore say that because of these statistics there should be no investigation and there should be immunity from the investigation,바카라 the bench observed.
It then referred to the principle of equality and gave an example of press freedom, while asserting the fundamental right is equal for all.
바카라Ultimately even the press has no higher freedom than what is available to a common citizen under Article 19 (1) (a) (freedom of speech and expression) of the Constitution. A political leader is also basically a citizen and therefore as citizens we all are amenable to the same law,바카라 it said.
The court said as the parties have conceded that political leaders do not enjoy immunity like other citizens, it cannot pass general directions.
바카라Take a case which does not involve the threat of bodily harm. Day-in and day-out, we get cases of financial scams. Somebody takes away 10 thousand crores, five thousand crores from retired pensioners or from ordinary middle class people and does not refund the amount ... No payments are made. Complaints are filed. Usually, the FIRs are filed and then a case is filed for clubbing of the FIRs. We deal with it,바카라 the CJI said.
The court said these cases are of financial scams and provide for lesser offences, and asked if it can pass an order that there will be no arrest.
바카라Once we accept that the political leaders stand absolutely on the same footing as the citizens of the country and they are entitled to the same protection of the due process of law then we cannot say that they are entitled to higher immunity,바카라 the court said, adding it cannot do what essentially lies in the domain of the legislature.
These statistics pertain only to politicians and hence general guidelines cannot be passed, it said. If an ordinary citizen is arrested for putting out a tweet and some cartoon, then it can be understood that he has no access to the top court, the bench said. 바카라Political leaders cannot say this,바카라 the CJI said.
On the issue of shrinking of space for political differences, it said, 바카라That is the problem with your formulation. When you say that the space for the opposition has shrunk then the answer to this lies in political space itself not in the court.바카라
The bench said the guidelines sought to be issued may result in a situation where a police or ED officer will have no discretion to make an arrest.
Singhvi said he was not seeking any particular relief in a particular case and the parties, which represent 42 per cent of the electorate in the country, wanted prospective guidelines of pre and post-arrest procedures to be adopted by the central probe agencies.
Earlier, the joint plea was mentioned for urgent hearing on March 24 by Singhvi.
The plea alleged there has been an alarming rise in the use of coercive criminal processes against opposition political leaders and other citizens exercising their fundamental right to dissent.
Besides the Congress, the parties to the petition included the DMK, RJD, BRS, Trinamool Congress, AAP, NCP, Shiv Sena (UBT), JMM, JD(U), CPI(M), CPI, Samajwadi Party and the J&K National Conference, the statement said.