Though India is urgently in need of a strong whistleblower protection law, the Supreme Court seems to be pulling in a contrary direction. It has asked Prashant Bhushan, appearing on behalf of the Centre for Public Interest Litigation, to share under sealed cover the source of the photocopy of the damaging visitors book at the residence of CBI chief Ranjit Sinha. The action reopens a debate over source protection, which began over 100 years ago with the sedition trial of Sri Aurobindo, when Bipin Chandra Pal was jailed for refusing to confirm that Aurobindo had written an anonymous tract that he published.
Of course, whistleblower protection can never be absolute, but balanced against the public and the national interest. But how would establishing the source advance the case against Sinha, who has denied the authenticity of the document? For he has done this rather erratically, with the percentage of veracity seesawing like a market index. Besides, if documentary authenticity is the moot issue, there are technical means to appraise it. The handwriting of security officers at Sinha’s residence can be analysed and matched with the visitors book. Besides, it is trivial to check the cellphone records of visitors in the book, to see if they were in the vicinity at the times noted.
