|
|
By: V Sundaram, IAS, Retd.
October 01, 2006
Views
expressed here are author’s own and not of this website. Full disclaimer
is at the bottom.
Feedback
‘Lying has a kind of respect and reverence with it. We pay a Congress
Minister the compliment of acknowledging a superiority whenever we lie to
him’.—a Congress Commandment
‘Without carefully contrived “Secular Lies”, Congress would perish of
despair and boredom’ — a Congress Catechism
Walter Scot said that an hour of crowded glory is worth an age without a
name. Such a moment of crowded glory for the Supreme Court of India was
achieved by two great judges Justice Arijit Pasayat and Justice
S.H.Kapadia when they held on Wednesday that the power of pardon,
clemency, reprieve or remission of sentence to a convict exercised by the
President under Article 72 of the Constitution and by the Governor under
Article 161 of the Constitution, is subject to judicial review. Setting
aside a decision of the former Andhra Pradesh Governor Sushil Kumar Shinde,
remitting the sentence of a Congress activist Gouru Venkata Reddy who was
undergoing a ten-year prison sentence in connection with the killing of
two persons including a TDP activist, the SC bench of Justices S H Kapadia
and Arijit Pasayat warned that the exercise of the clemency power would be
tested by the court against the maintenance of Rule of Law. Fortunately
for the innocent, law-abiding citizens of India, these two great Judges
have overturned an order of that Sonia-servile, ever-puerile, ever-tepid
and non-descript former Governor of Andhra Pradesh Shinde who allowed
himself to be led by the partisan political considerations of the Chief
Minister of Andhra Pradesh, Y.Samuel Rajasekar Reddy.
The facts of this case read like an Agatha Christie novel. Gouru Venkata
Reddy was sentenced by the Supreme Court for ten years for his criminal
murder of TDP worker Epuru Chinna Ramasubbaiah. The sons of the deceased
had taken the matter to the Supreme Court alleging that a pardon was
granted by Governor Shinde to Gouru Venkata Reddy purely on “narrow party
based Congress political considerations and not on grounds of rule of law
and the Constitution”. They had also alleged that the Governor had passed
the order of pardon after a simple note was sent to him by Y S Rajshekhra
Reddy government without even placing before the Governor the records of
the case. A Bench consisting of Mr Justice Arijit Pasayat and Mr Justice S
H Kapadia, while taking note of the allegations in the petition made by
the sons of the deceased TDP worker, had directed the State government to
place the entire record on the process of granting pardon to Gowru Venkata
Reddy, whose wife is a sitting Congress MLA, before the Supreme Court. The
Supreme Court had also appointed former Attorney-General Soli J. Sorabjee
amicas curiea to assist it in the matter. The most unfortunate aspect of
this case is that the Andhra Pradesh Government, without any regard for
legal or constitutional considerations, advised Governor Sushil Kumar
Shinde to grant pardon to a criminally indicted Congressman, whose case
according to them stood solidly ‘fortified’ only by virtue of the fact
that his wife is a sitting Congress MLA. In this planned criminal process
of subversion of the Constitution, something akin to the disrobement of
Draupadi in the court of the Kauravas in the Mahabaratha, was enacted in
Andhra Pradesh, with Governor Shinde and Chief Minister Y.Samuel Rajasekar
Reddy colluding together like Dushasana and Duryodana. For these two
Congress Kauravas, the private interest of a secular congress convict
seemed more important than the Indian Constitution; the political welfare
of the criminal Congress party more sacred than public welfare. According
to this wicked duo, Gouru Venkata Reddy, the shameless Congress criminal,
was only guilty of a private murder of a TDP worker Epuru Chinna
Ramasubbaiah. These two disgusting and disgraceful Congress men in high
authority are guilty of the unpardonable public murder of the Indian
Constitution and The Rule of Law.
I would like to quote extensively from this historic and landmark
judgment of the Supreme Court by Hon. Justices S H Kapadia and Arijit
Pasayat:
“Rule of Law is the basis for evaluation of all decisions (by the
court)... The supreme quality of the Rule of Law is fairness and legal
certainty. Every prerogative has to be subject to the Rule of Law. The
Rule of Law cannot be compromised on grounds of political expediency. To
go by such considerations would be subversive of the fundamental
principles of the Rule of Law and it would amount to setting a dangerous
precedent”.
“The President and the Governor are the sole judges of the sufficiency of
facts and of the appropriating of granting the pardons and reprieves.
However, this power is an enumerated power in the Constitution itself. The
principle of exclusive cognizance would not apply when and if the decision
impugned is in derogation of a Constitutional provision. This is the basic
working test to be applied while granting pardons, reprieves, remissions
and commutations”.
“These are not acts of grace. They are part of the Constitutional scheme.
When a pardon is granted, it is the determination of the ultimate
authority that public welfare will be better served by inflicting less
than what the judgment has fixed. Granting pardon is in no sense an
overturning of a conviction, but is rather an executive action that would
mitigate or set aside the punishment of a crime. It eliminates the effect
of conviction without addressing the defendant’s guilt or innocence. The
exercise of executive clemency is a matter of discretion and yet subject
to certain standards. It is not a matter of privilege. It is a matter of
official duty…the power of executive clemency is not only for the benefit
of the convict, but while exercising such a power the President or the
Governor as the case may be, has to keep in mind the effect of his
decision on the family of the victims, the society as a whole and the
precedent it sets for the future. It is vested in the President or the
Governor, not for the benefit of the convict only but for the welfare of
the people who may insist on the performance of the duty. THE CONTROLLING
FACTOR IN DETERMINING WHETHER THE EXERCISE OF PREROGATIVE POWER IS SUBJECT
TO JUDICIAL REVIEW IS NOT ITS SOURCE BUT ITS SUBJECT MATTER”.
Finally the Supreme Court has made a supreme contribution to the existing
corpus of defined and substantive Constitutional Law when it has declared
with courage, conviction, clarity and candour: “It can no longer be said
that prerogative power is ipso facto immune from judicial review. An undue
exercise of this power is to be deplored. Considerations of religion,
caste or political loyalty are irrelevant and fraught with discrimination.
These are prohibited grounds. Rule of law is the basis for evaluation of
all decisions”.
When I see the callous political behavior of so called senior Congress
men of the slavish Servants of Sonia Congress party today, I cannot help
quoting the words of Walt Whitman, the great poet of American democracy,
who wrote about the politicians of his time in 1880:
“The members who composed it were, seven-eighths of them, the meanest kind
of bawling and blowing officeholders, office-seekers, pimps, malignant,
conspirators, murderers, fancy-men, custom-house clerks, contractors,
kept-editors, spaniels well-trained to carry and fetch, jobbers, infidels,
disunions, terrorists, mail-riflers, slave-catchers, pushers of
slavery, creatures of the Presidents, creatures of would-be Presidents,
spies, bribers, compromisers, lobbyers, sponges, ruined sports, expelled
gamblers, policy-backers, monte-dealers, duelists, carriers of concealed
weapons, deaf men, pimpled men, scarr’d inside with vile disease, gaudy
outside with gold chains made from the people's money and harlots" money
twisted together; crawling, serpentine men, the lousy combining and born
freedom-sellers of the earth”.--- (WALT WHITMAN: Origins of attempted
Seccession,1880’)
Leo Tolstoy, perhaps, had mean and unscrupulous men like supine Governor
Shinde, servile Chief Minister Y.S.Reddy and the Imperious Super Sonia,
the de facto Prime Minister, in his view when he penned the following
immortal lines in his Anna Karenina:
“Hypocrisy is anything whatever may deceive the cleverest and the most
penetrating man, but the least wide-awake of children recognizes it, and
is revolted by it, however ingeniously it may be disguised”.
I know that some of the top political criminals of the Congress Party
would love to overturn this Supreme Court verdict by proposing an
amendment to the Constitution with the willing connivance of other
political parties in the UPA coalition. The bold and heroic judgment
given by Justice Pasayat and Justice S.H.Kapadia is very reminiscent of an
immortal judgment given by lord Mansfield in England in the famous John
Wilkes case in 1780: “I wish popularity: but it is that popularity that
follows, not that which is run after. It is that popularity which, sooner
or later, never fails to do justice to the pursuit of noble ends, by noble
means. I will not do that which conscience tells me is wrong, upon this
occasion, to gain the huzzas of thousands, or the daily praise of all the
papers which come from the Press. I will not avoid doing what I think is
right, though it should draw on me the whole artillery of libels; all that
falsehood and malice can invent, or the credulity of a deluded populace
can follow”.
Two hundred years later, in a more modern context, Justice Hiller B. Zobel
in USA declared in a judgment: “Elected officials may consider popular
urging and sway to public opinion polls. Judges must follow their oaths
and do their duty, heedless of editorials, letters, telegrams, picketers,
threats, petitions, panellists and talk shows. In this country, we do not
administer justice by plebiscite”.
V Sundaram, IAS, Retd.
Send your views to author
Do you wish to reach our readers?
submit
your guest column
Copyright and Disclaimer:
The views expressed in this article are the author's own and not of this
website. The author is solely responsible for the contents of this
article. This website does not represent or endorse the accuracy,
completeness or reliability of any opinion, statement, appeal, advice or
any other information in the article. Our readers are free to forward this
page URL to anyone. This column may NOT be transmitted or distributed by
others in any manner whatsoever (other than forwarding or web listing page
URL) without the prior permission from
us and the author. |
Previous articles by:
V Sundaram, IAS, Retd.
Hail! Hail! Vande Mataram
Divine melody of Dilip Kumar Roy
Shameful land of two PMs & 100 nations!
India: A failed State?
Islamic Indian Nationalism
Training "prospective" harvesters of souls
Heralding the second freedom movement
ASI and planned death of history
Haven for abetted Evangelism on stilts
Congress-sponsored Negationism
Are Kashmiri Pundits abandoned dregs?
Nehruism, communism and secularism!
Forgotten prophet of Indian nationalism
Dark Side of Christian History
The Da Vinci tsunami
All articles by:
V Sundaram, IAS, Retd. |