‘Prob­ing pro­bity not an anath­ema’

The New Indian Express - - CHENNAI -

“PRO­BITY in pub­lic life is a con­cern of all cit­i­zens. The in­ter­est of polity is to see that its pub­lic ser­vants are above board. Prob­ing the pro­bity of per­sons in high power is not an anath­ema. The al­le­ga­tions or ac­cu­sa­tions against the per­sons in power can be purged only through an in­de­pen­dent in­ves­ti­ga­tion process which is fair, just, rea­son­able and trans­par­ent which a pub­lic ser­vant should find as a stage to vin­di­cate his stand. When al­le­ga­tions of such se­ri­ous na­ture had been made, an hon­est en­deav­our should have been taken by the per­sons in power to vol­un­tar­ily trans­fer the case to an in­de­pen­dent agency to clear the cloud so that it would in­still con­fi­dence in the minds of cit­i­zens,” the judge added.

“In view of the above ob­ser­va­tions, this court di­rects the re­spon­dent to hand over the en­tire case pa­pers and files re­lat­ing to the com­plaint filed by the pe­ti­tioner (along with the ma­te­ri­als col­lected so far) to the Joint Di­rec­tor, Cen­tral Bureau of In­ves­ti­ga­tion (South Zone) within a week and the Joint Di­rec­tor shall de­pute an of­fi­cer un­der him in the rank of a Su­per­in­ten­dent of Po­lice who shall in­de­pen­dently con­duct a pre­lim­i­nary en­quiry afresh ex­am­in­ing the pe­ti­tioner/in­for­mant, of­fi­cials of the World Bank and other per­sons wcon­nected with the projects men­tioned in the com­plaint and con­clude the same prefer­ably within three months. If the en­quiry dis­closes of­fences of cog­nis­able na­ture, he shall reg­is­ter a case and pro­ceed in ac­cor­dance with law,” the judge said.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from India

© PressReader. All rights reserved.