The misuse of India’s investigative agencies
The dead cannot cry out for justice. It is the duty of the living to do so for them. This proverb has been on my mind, triggered by the court’s decision to exonerate a person involved in a high-profile case for want of evidence. Does this mean that the police, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and other investigating agencies did not properly discharge their duties? Were they “managed”? Did they act at the behest of someone, perhaps as tools of political revenge?
I am speaking of Congress Member of Parliament (MP) Shashi Tharoor. On January 17, 2014, his wife, Sunanda Pushkar, was found dead in a five-star hotel room in Delhi. A case of murder was registered against unknown persons on January 1, 2015, after a preliminary investigation by the police. After further investigation, a case was registered against Tharoor. He was accused of abetment to suicide. Given Tharoor’s public profile, the case came under the public scanner and he was vilified by many. He remained steadfast.
One can only imagine what kind of mental torture he must have endured during this period. However, after examining 97 witnesses, Delhi special judge, Geetanjali Goel, found that none of the charges against him had any basis, and acquitted him. Did the police file a charge-sheet in the hope that the court would find evidence of guilt during the examination of witnesses? The recent verdict exonerating him raises questions about the working of the Delhi police and investigative agencies in India.
Let us look at the 2G case. At that time, it seemed as if the leaders of the Congress and the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) had crossed all the limits of corruption. The then Union minister, D Raja, and MP, P Kanimozhi, were put behind bars for months. Kanimozhi is the daughter of the late chief minister of Tamil Nadu, M Karunanidhi. The issue had an impact on the Lok Sabha and assembly elections. The DMK lost power and the Congress was defeated in an unprecedented manner. And then, a special CBI court acquitted all the accused. Who will compensate for the humiliation that they had to endure during this time?
The Bofors case was a similar story. Rajiv Gandhi was in power at that time with a majority. He was also the youngest prime minister at that time and India’s youth had high expectations of him. In 1989, he was defeated in an election because of the Bofors case. Since then, the Bofors case has gone out of the public eye, but what about those who had hoped for a new dawn with Rajiv Gandhi?
I say, with regret, that during the long years since Independence, successive governments have misused the country’s investigative agencies. That is why the Madras High Court last week sternly asked CBI to get released itself from the cage. The moniker of a caged parrot was given to India’s investigative agency by the Supreme Court itself.
In my 40-year career, when it comes to compliance with the law, I think of two people. One was a rickshaw puller, Jumman Khan, who was to be sentenced to death in Agra jail for murdering a teenage girl . A few days before the execution, a reporter met him. Bereft of all hope, he kept saying, “Babuji, I did not kill the girl”. There is an old saying that a dying man never lies.
Similarly, in the 1980s, a man imprisoned for a long time without being proved to have committed any crime, was released, thanks to media reports.
The man, Deepchand, was arrested by the police during the British raj on suspicion of disturbing the peace. He could have got bail, but he did not have the means to do so. No one in his family knew that he was sent to Naini jail from Kanpur. Decades passed and he remained in jail. The court and officials took cognisance of the matter only after news about this was published in a newspaper. By then, it was too late.
Deepchand no longer remembered his home address or had any memory of his family. The prison was his only refuge. Even after his release, he was found wandering around the prison in a deranged state. He later died, banging his head against the walls of the room where he was incarcerated.
What do the stories of Deepchand and the rickshaw puller tell us? The inhuman rules created during the British era remain. Those in power can use State agencies to pursue their interest. But now is the time for change. Citizens of a sovereign and democratic country have a fundamental right to live a life without discrimination. When will that happen? I await that day.