COURTESY HT DEC 12

Cannot cure all ills of system, says top court
Utkarsh Anand

letters@hindustantimes.com

New Delhi : The Supreme Court on Friday said that the responsibility of curing all the ills of 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.

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 for a comprehensive probe. Upadhyay complained there has been no follow-up on the report submitted by then Union home secretary NN Vohra on the alleged link between crime syndicates, politicians and bureaucrats.

“...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,” said the bench, as Upadhyay opted to withdraw the PIL with liberty to approach Law Commission first.

Vineet Narain, a noted anti-corruption activist, said, “The Supreme Court is right in saying that judiciary can’t change everything by itself. When the majority of politicians and bureaucrats seem to be shirking their duties in tackling corruption and have rather become a cause of it, one cannot expect judiciary to do wonders. These changes must begin as a society and then we can demand stronger laws