Wednesday, Oct 22, 2014

All officials equal, no govt sanction needed to probe

The SC held as unconstitutional the provision which makes sanction of competent authority mandatory for CBI. The SC held as unconstitutional the provision which makes sanction of competent authority mandatory for CBI.
Written by Utkarsh Anand | New Delhi | Posted: May 6, 2014 2:00 pm | Updated: May 7, 2014 1:58 am

“Status or position” cannot shield an officer of the level of joint secretary and above from unconstrained probe by the CBI in cases of corruption, the Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday, quashing a law that requires the agency to go to the government to seek approval for the investigation.

A five-judge constitution bench led by Chief Justice R M Lodha ruled that Section 6A of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act (DSPEA), which shackles investigations without approvals, was “discriminatory”, and “impedes tracking down the corrupt senior bureaucrats”.

The court said that “the protection in Section 6A has propensity of shielding the corrupt”. The provision “suffers from the vice of classifying offenders differently for treatment thereunder for inquiry and investigation of offences, according to their status in life”, it said.

“Every person accused of committing the same offence is to be dealt with in the same manner in accordance with law. The status or position of public servant does not qualify such public servant from exemption from equal treatment. The decision making power does not segregate corrupt officers into two classes as they are common crime doers and have to be tracked down by the same process of inquiry and investigation,” the bench said.

“Can there be sound differentiation between corrupt public servants based on their status? Surely not, because irrespective of their status or position, corrupt public servants are corrupters of public power. The corrupt public servants, whether high or low, are birds of the same feather and must be confronted with the process of investigation and inquiry equally. Based on the position or status in service, no distinction can be made.”

The bench expressed the opinion that this provision in the DSPE Act defeated the objectives of the Prevention of Corruption Act, framed to deal with corruption and to act against senior public servants.

“The result of the impugned legislation is that the very group of persons, namely, high ranking bureaucrats whose misdeeds and illegalities may have to be inquired into, would decide whether the CBI should even start an inquiry or investigation against them or not,” the court said.

The CBI, it added, could not be insulated from “political and bureaucratic control and influence because the approval is to be taken from the central government, which would involve leaks and disclosures at every stage”.

“Office of public power cannot be the workshop of personal gain. The probity in public life is of great importance. How can two public servants against whom there are allegations of corruption or graft or bribe-taking or criminal misconduct under the PC Act, be made to be treated differently because one happens to be a junior officer and the other a senior decision maker?” the bench asked.

It allowed the petitions filed by BJP leader Subramanian Swamy and NGO Centre for continued…

comments powered by Disqus
Featured ad: Discount Shopping
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,284 other followers