Judiciary alone cannot cure all ills
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Friday said that the responsibility of curing all the ills in society doesn’t rest solely with the judiciary, and appeared to suggest that the executive and legislative wings were not always keen on stronger laws to control corruption.
A bench headed by justice Sanjay K Kaul added that it was not possible for the judiciary to take over all the roles and entertain petitions with “Utopian” prayers.
“You are all asking for a Utopian situations, and Utopia doesn’t exist. For every person getting illicit money, there is one person distributing it,” said the bench, as it took up two separate public interest litigations filed by advocate Ashwini Upadhyay relating to corruption.
In the first petition, Upadhyay pressed for life imprisonment in cases of black money, corruption, money laundering, tax evasion, food adulteration and cheating.
Arguing for the plea, senior advocate Gopal Sanakaranarayan rued the lack of will on the part of the government to come up with more stringent measures, pointing out that the target of corruption appears to be within the executive wing.
The bench responded that there could be some substance in what the lawyer has to say, but it is not for the court to ask Parliament to frame a specific law on punishment for a certain category of crimes.
“You may be right in saying it that the executive wing might not be keen to frame stringent laws but can we be entertaining a petition such as this? This court administers law. It is for Parliament to make laws. We cannot issue a mandamus to Parliament to make a law,” it said.
When there is no vacuum in law, said the bench, it is not for a constitutional court to entertain “all-encompassing” prayers in a petition asking for a declaration in the nature that all is not well in the country.
“Curing all the ills in the system does not prevail only with the judiciary. There are executive and legislative wings too with specific roles. You cannot expect judiciary to take over all roles and do everything. It is impossible. It is never envisaged in the Constitution nor desirable,” commented the bench.
The court advised that Upadhyay, instead of leading a campaign, should rather try to persuade lawmakers. “Look at your prayers. It looks like you are asking for a declaration that everything is not well in the country. It is just like asking a court to remove poverty, bring accountability, improve the conditions of the country.”
It added: “Unless we all change our thinking as a society, this situation will not improve. The problem is when we are on the side of getting the benefits, we don’t have a problem but when things are not palpable, we have issues.”
At this, Sankaranarayan chose to withdraw the PIL with the liberty to go to the Law Commission for examining the issue of enhanced punishment in corruption-related cases.
Upadhyay’s second PIL before the same bench was listed as the next matter. It pleaded for a direction to the Centre for handing hand over the 1993 report of the Vohra Committee to various Central agencies, including the National Investigation Agency,
Central Bureau of Investigation, Enforcement Directorate, Intelligence Bureau, Serious Fraud Investigation Office, Research & Analysis Wing, Central Bureau of Direct Taxes, and Narcotics Control Bureau, for a comprehensive probe into the criminalpolitician nexus.
Upadhyay complained there has been no follow-up action on the report submitted by then Union home secretary NN Vohra on the alleged link between crime syndicates, politicians and bureaucrats.
“Look at your prayers. It is all Utopian. I hope our country will have top class of people. I hope everything is improved. You are making these kinds of prayers. Write a book on it. Don’t file petitions like this. One can understand cases where a nudge can be given to government authorities but not with such Utopian prayers. A petition must be able to serve some purpose,” said the bench, as Upadhyay again opted to withdraw the PIL with the liberty to approach the Law Commission first.