Travesty of justice is all one can say. A well run state is rundown by
vicious vendetta. If murder trials at supreme court can be heard for final plea
for a person facing death or life in thirty minutes, then surely when the fate
of millions of people of the state also acutely depends on quicker and just
dispensing of justice.
I have dared to highlight the other side!
People see everything in pure black and white only. Anything apparently against corrupt politicians is right! Unfortunately the Judges too does not dare to give benefit of doubt when the person is a politician accused of corruption now-a-days.
People see everything in pure black and white only. Anything apparently against corrupt politicians is right! Unfortunately the Judges too does not dare to give benefit of doubt when the person is a politician accused of corruption now-a-days.
The point is that last 18 years nothing was happening in this case and
suddenly on day of retirement a judge pronounces a judgement like this and that
is why the question of travesty of justice.
Murder trials can hang for decades in court, but when it comes for plea and hearing at SC, it now just gets 30 minutes for ruling Chief Minister of a State!!!
There has to be balance.
I am in favour of justice and not politics of vendetta. If justice was just, then Tata would not have got his restrained orders in Radia Tape cases in less than few hours in Supreme Court where common man can even die waiting for justice.
If that was the case, then all politicians who are occupying parliament should be heard and stand justice in 30 minutes & why not?
I just gave you 2 examples. She is not the only one guilty and the entire system is corrupt, look at Manu Singhvi case now? These are the guys who cry foul for black money and mock the justice system.
The question is not of taking any side, for or against.
Murder trials can hang for decades in court, but when it comes for plea and hearing at SC, it now just gets 30 minutes for ruling Chief Minister of a State!!!
There has to be balance.
I am in favour of justice and not politics of vendetta. If justice was just, then Tata would not have got his restrained orders in Radia Tape cases in less than few hours in Supreme Court where common man can even die waiting for justice.
If that was the case, then all politicians who are occupying parliament should be heard and stand justice in 30 minutes & why not?
I just gave you 2 examples. She is not the only one guilty and the entire system is corrupt, look at Manu Singhvi case now? These are the guys who cry foul for black money and mock the justice system.
The question is not of taking any side, for or against.
That is not the point.
What is worrisome for last few years in India is the sensationalism in
the justice system. The jurisprudence premises cannot be left to
interpretations at the fancy of a judge, but on the crystallised precept of
principles enshrined in the legal system and constitution.
No one should be above law, but the homogeneity of its application when drifted, makes it biased. A just system of justice is the first pillar of democracy, which now is either getting questioned or is becoming weak due to vigilante and activism.
No one should be above law, but the homogeneity of its application when drifted, makes it biased. A just system of justice is the first pillar of democracy, which now is either getting questioned or is becoming weak due to vigilante and activism.
This needs scrutiny. And a justice and legal system cannot be a cloistered virtue
and must have the sagacity and capacity to address the public opinion and
censures & scrutiny, if necessary.
Justice is about hopes of people to feel
secure in a democracy that their rights would not be trampled by high and
mighty, but would be able to stand on equal footing. Do we have the same
feeling today for the system?
We must remember that regional pride is more crucial and an anchor in a
federal system, which mustn't be smothered by force.
Tamil Nadu was, as of now, is amongst the better run state where common people saw a lot of hope from current incumbency, which was hurt and therefore, the problem.
Tamil Nadu was, as of now, is amongst the better run state where common people saw a lot of hope from current incumbency, which was hurt and therefore, the problem.
Jaya was also out of power for 8 years, where was the justice then? They
could have prosecuted her then and no one would have groused.
But now a well run state, people have other views on the state benefits, which is fine, but to put the entire administration in disarray at a stroke of a pen after 18 years hurts.
Imagine the Godhra cases being standing retrials today and Modi is convicted today, what will happen to India? Utter chaos, but it will survive. Similar is the case of TN, it will survive but chaos would prevail. Judgement needs to have a holistic view and not a populist outlook of sensationalism to get famous. Even CJ's have resorted to such antics; 2G & Coalgate are classic example where a Judge on his retirement day or just before that pronounces a judgement.
But now a well run state, people have other views on the state benefits, which is fine, but to put the entire administration in disarray at a stroke of a pen after 18 years hurts.
Imagine the Godhra cases being standing retrials today and Modi is convicted today, what will happen to India? Utter chaos, but it will survive. Similar is the case of TN, it will survive but chaos would prevail. Judgement needs to have a holistic view and not a populist outlook of sensationalism to get famous. Even CJ's have resorted to such antics; 2G & Coalgate are classic example where a Judge on his retirement day or just before that pronounces a judgement.
Let us not forget that in democracy all are always not equal, if it was
so then why provide immunity to PM & President only during their tenure and
why not to CM’s in a federal system?
And that is the Point.
