11. Dr. MANMOHAN SINGH AND THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

11

THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

1.In a significant ruling, a five-Judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court of India, on 5 May 2005, held that erring companies are liable for criminal prosecution and could be punished with imposition of fine for fraud and financial irregularities. However, the Bench said that only fine could be imposed on the companies, as imprisonment could not be awarded to a company. The reason given is that the companies are only juristic and not natural persons.

      The majority view held “the law equally applies to actual and juristic persons. The law does not grant blanket immunity to companies if found guilty of offences”.  

    A judge in his concurring judgement said that in view of the large-scale financial irregularities witnessed in the country and its bad effects on the country’s economy as well on the society, it was necessary that companies should also face prosecution along with those who committed the offences.

     Two learned judges differed with the majority.

It must be noted that the court quite unequivocally admitted the large-scale financial irregularities that had taken place in India.

       The High Court, Delhi quashed all charges against three Hinduja brothers in the Bofors case. The Court said that the CBI failed to produce original documents. The Court deplored that the exchequer had to spend 240 crore in the 64 crore pay off case and thereby tarnishing the image of political leaders for more than 20 years.

      In the meantime there were reports that the National Judicial Academy decided to conduct a three-day refresher course to the learned judges of the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court Bench comprising Justice Y.K.Sabharwal, Justice D.M. Dharmadhikari and Justice B.N.Krishna on 19 July 2005 cancelled 81 petrol pump allotments that were granted on extraneous considerations.  The enquiry committee headed by Justice S.C.Agarwal had identified these companies as tainted. Thus, the Supreme Court cancelled the allotments made by the NDA Government to its kith & kin. Now Reliance Industries alone is permitted to allot 5000 petrol pumps to its kith & kin and the Supreme Court sits as if it is immune to environmental changes. Does anything in the Constitution- Liberty, Equality or Fraternity- justify it?

On 24 July 2005, Justice Markandey Katju, Chief Justice of High Court, Madras, said, “The people have the right to criticize judges because they are supreme. They are our masters and as masters, they have the right to criticize their servants. They have the right to take the judges to task if they do not discharge their duties properly”. The Chief Justice said this recognizing himself as the master of people.