I Differ with their Lordships of the Supreme Court

Appeal leeway for CBI, bad news for states
OUR BUREAU

April 1: The Supreme Court today upheld the CBI’s power to decide not to appeal against the acquittal of Lalu Prasad in an assets case, denying state governments a say in such matters and fuelling fears that the agency will have a freer hand now to tailor its stand to suit the reigning power at the Centre.

The state (Bihar) government cannot file an appeal against the CBI court’s order even if it were dissatisfied with the court order, a three-judge bench, headed by Chief Justice K.G. Balakrishnan, said.

The verdict not only handed a morale-boosting reprieve to the RJD chief but also a snub to his rival and Bihar chief minister Nitish Kumar ahead of the Assembly polls scheduled this winter.

“(The) Bihar government is not a competent authority to file an appeal in the case,” the three-judge bench said, frustrating an attempt by the Nitish administration to entangle Lalu Prasad and his wife Rabri Devi again in the fodder scam-related case.

In December 2006, a CBI court had cleared the couple of the charge of amassing property worth Rs 46 lakh beyond their known sources of income while Lalu Prasad was chief minister between 1990 and 1997.

When the CBI failed to challenge the UPA ally’s acquittal, the NDA government in Bihar filed an appeal in Patna High Court in 2007 against the lower court verdict. The high court admitted the appeal and issued notices to all parties concerned.

Lalu Prasad and Rabri, as well as the CBI, then challenged the high court decision in the apex court, which has now ruled that the Centre and the CBI are the only competent authorities to appeal against the acquittal.

A disappointed Bihar deputy chief minister, Sushil Kumar Modi of the BJP, said the state government would decide its next course of action after consulting legal experts.

Lalu Prasad welcomed the verdict saying the “Supreme Court is like a god” but skirted controversy by refraining from targeting his opponents.

The RJD chief faces six more fodder scam cases, five of which are in various stages of trial in Ranchi, the capital of Jharkhand, and one in Bihar. In each of these cases, Lalu Prasad has been named a “conspirator” in the allegedly fraudulent withdrawal of about Rs 900 crore from treasuries in Bihar, and from some that are now in Jharkhand, during the RJD’s 15-year rule.

Some legal experts said today’s judgment was likely to impact several high-profile cases pending with the CBI. “In coalition-era politics, the Centre could use the CBI to swing cases in favour of supporters and fix opponents,” one of them said. “The state governments can now do nothing in these cases once the probe is handed over to the CBI.”

The is the second blow in recent months to state governments in issues involving the CBI. The Supreme Court had earlier ruled that CBI probes can be activated without a state government’s recommendation in exceptional circumstances.

The Nitish government had contended it had the power to appeal the assets case acquittal since the alleged crime was committed in the state. It argued that Section 378(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code merely gave “additional power” to the Centre to decide whether to appeal acquittals in CBI cases.

The high court accepted this stand. The CBI, however, argued that a state government could not go against the Centre’s executive decision (not to file an appeal) in the case. Lalu Prasad and Rabri echoed this.

Asked if the CBI had helped Lalu Prasad, Modi said: “This was clear from the very beginning that the CBI was supporting him.... The CBI should, in the normal course, have appealed against the judgment of the lower court, but only because of the influence of Prasad, the CBI never went in for appeal.” Asked whether Sonia Gandhi had bailed Lalu Prasad out, he said: “Naturally.”

The RJD chief had been sent to jail six times in fodder cases, including once in 2000 in connection with the assets case.

As a layman, I normally agree with the judgements of the Supreme Court but in the above case I beg to differ.
If the CBI was an independent agency, I would not hesitate to concur with their lordships but the CBI is the pet poodle of the government at the centre and time and again the central government has used the CBI to further its agenda.
The CBI has been used to harass people if they were against the centre and cases have been withdrawn by the CBI against people if they supported the central government.
In Lalu's case, the CBI has been forced to go slow on his cases and finally withdraw because Lalu was a minister in the first UPA government and Manmohan Singh required his help to remain a P M.
Of course, it does not mean Nitish Kumar is any cleaner.
He too has his quota of criminals in his party. He did not file the case to fight corruption. He raised the issue to keep Lalu busy with his court cases.
Is it any surprise that Swami Ramdeo's popularity is increasing by the day. His is a fight against these corrupt scoundrels.