Jayalalithaa DA Case Verdict: Indian Judiciary At Its Lowest Ebb

In the recent past PM Narendra Modi claimed that there was not even a single allegation of corruption against his government in the last one year tenure of the BJP led government at the Centre. It may be recalled that BJP rode to power highlighting corruption in the UPA government’s 10 year stint under former prime minister Manmohan Singh. But the irony now is that two big cases – that of Bollywood superstar Salman Khan and AIADMK supremo Jayalalithaa – have come to haunt the NDA government’s tall claims. This put a veritable question mark on the Modi government and the judicial system of the country. Some sort of explanation is required to justify the verdicts.
The rot in the judicial system peeved CPM Kerala state leader M V Jayarajan so much that he dared to call the judges of Kerala ‘idiots’. The court took note of it and serious action followed in regard to the outburst. MV Jayarajan was handed a 30-day imprisonment sentence.

The case is quite interesting. HC judgement was against the hartal and protest meeting terming it an anti social and anti india campaign. If an individual or a group of individuals protest at any corner of the city, how can a judge term it as anti social or anti India campaign? The judiciary it appears is going on the same lines as politics in the country and the bureaucracy, raising questions on its integrity.

Former chief justice VN Khare has stated that more than 15% of judges are corrupt. After reprieve for Salman Khan, followed by acquittal of Jayalalitha in the disproportionate assets case, the system is set to face the repercussions as voices have begun echoing on social media attacking the judicial system in India. The court was unable to see what was common knowledge. If the property and farm house in Secunderabad, a tea garden in Nilgiri, huge amount of jewellery and assets in Tamil Nadu were not enough to implicate Jayalalithaa, then one fails to fathom what possibly could.

Hereon, every judgement is going to be watched closely. The judgement day for the judges who are supposed to uphold the values of the constitution of the nation is imminent.

How Salman Khan Hit And Run Case Ruined Bodyguard Ravindra Patil’s Life

Ravindra Patil, a young boy from Satara district joined the Mumbai Police as a constable and later trained as a commando to join the Special Operations Squad (SOS) which has a primary duty of guarding VIPs. He was later assigned as Salman Khan’s unarmed bodyguard after the actor complained to Mumbai Police about threats from the underworld.

A Mumbai court has sentenced Salman Khan to 5 years in prison in the infamous hit-and-run case. It was in 2002 that the incident happened and Patil, as a law abiding policeman, stood as prime witness of the incident stating that it was in fact Salman Khan who was driving when the accident occurred.

Life of Ravindra Patil after giving his testimony

After giving his statement that Salman Khan was under the influence of alcohol and he (Salman) was behind the wheel at the time of the incident, it was claimed that Patil received a lot of pressure to withdraw his statement.

Patil was later locked in Arthur road jail because he failed to appear for five consecutive court dates. He lost his job as policeman and was kept in jail with hardened criminals for his absence from the court. He was reportedly ill-treated and tortured inside the jail.

After five years in 2007, he was found on the streets of Mumbai as a beggar, and was suffering from TB for over 2 years. During the hard time of Patil, police, media and family had forgotten him.

He passed away on October 4, 2007 of TB. Shockingly, his family had already cut him out of their life and they didn’t even claim or collect his body. It was around his death that Bollywood actor Salman Khan started his “Being Human” initiative. Being Human was founded on July 28, 2007 for helping the cause of healthcare and education.

Patil, who was with Salman Khan on the night of the accident where one man was killed and four other injured, had maintained till his death, that the actor was behind the wheel.

What happened at that night? (according to the statement of Ravindra Patil)

Ravindra Patil said the court, “It was 9:30 pm on September 27, 2002, the accused and Kamal Khan came out of a room at their residence and told me they were going to Rain Bar, Juhu. The accused had a Toyota Land Cruiser car with the registration number MH 01 DA 32. The accused was driving the car.”

“They asked me to wait outside, while the accused and Kamal went inside the hotel. The bodyguard of Sohail Khan also met me there. After a few hours, the accused and Kamal came out. The accused sat in the driver’s seat and I was sitting next to him. Kamal was sitting in the rear,” he had said.

Witness inside the Rain Bar

Moloy Baug, a bartender said the actor’s group had ordered liquor. Rizwan Rakhanngi, manager, said he saw Khan hold a glass full with a colourless liquid like water.

After Salman stepped out of Rain Bar

Patil said Salman Khan came out of Rain Bar at 2.15 am and they went to JW Marriott, where he was made to wait outside again. Patil then warned accused Salman to drive slow when Salman was driving at a speed of 90-100 km/hr.

 “They came out at 2.15am. When the accused sat behind the wheel, I asked him whether he would be driving the car. He ignored me. The accused was driving the car at a speed of 90-100 km/hour. Before reaching the Hill Road junction, I told the accused to slow down as a right turn was coming up. He ignored me again. The accused lost control of the car while taking a turn and drove right on to the footpath,” Patil had said.

Accident site

After a while, the car crashed into American Express bakery and broke its shutter. “There was a lot of shouting and people had gathered around us. I showed my identity card and told the crowd I was a policeman, which pacified them. The accused and Kamal ran away from the spot. I went to the car to check and saw that one person was seriously injured. There were four others who were stuck under the car,” Patil told the court.

After the incident and as the accused Salman Khan and Kamal fled away from the spot leaving the injured victims crying under his car wheel, it was Patil who called the Police Control Room for help and then lodged a complaint with Bandra Police.

“The incident took place because the car was in speed and the accused, in a drunken state, could not control the car while taking the turn,” he had said in the court.

May 6, 2015

Bollywood superstar Salman Khan was sentenced to five years in jail in the infamous 2002 hit-and-run case.
The above is from The Tehelka, Daily

By: Shovon Chowdhury

What are the lessons we learn from the Salman Khan case? One thing we don’t learn is how they got the case postponed from 2003 to 2013. This is a massive media failure. This information would have been very useful, but no one is telling us.

The Indian Penal Code is full of sections, and all of us are in constant danger of breaking the law. Very often, these things happen inadvertently. Sentiments get hurt. Curfews get violated. You insult Marathi cuisine. They find beef in your tiffin carrier. Your scooter breaks down and you obstruct a VIP. Not that you would be riding a scooter (you read ET).

The point is, there are so many pitfalls, legally speaking. It’s only a matter of time before pretty much all of us get arrested. This was the original intention of the Indian Penal Code of 1861: to ensure long-lasting suppression of the natives, after their unfortunate and rebellious behaviour in 1857. Through our behaviour, we established an indisputable fact. Each and every one of us has criminal tendencies. We need strong laws, and lots of them.

When they do come to take you away, you will curse the media for their inefficiency. “How did Salman do it?” you will wonder, “And how come ET never told me anything, even though I spend my hard-earned money on them on a daily basis?”

We never learnt from this case who convinced Salman’s driver to commit perjury. And since no one is investigating this, we never will. We will never learn the circumstances behind the mysterious death of a witness. This is because it was God’s will. When it’s time for a witness to go, he just has to go.

The risks of being human: The late Ravindra Patil, Khan’s police bodyguard

In this case, the witness, Constable Ravindra Patil, went slowly. First he was listed as ‘missing’. Then he was listed as ‘absconding’. After this’ he was put in jail, sacked and reduced to begging on the streets. Throughout, he refused to change his statement.

Eventually, he died of what appears to have been starvation. Or tuberculosis, depending on your source of news, not to mention opinions. His last words were, reportedly, “I want to meet the police commissioner once.” Why would he want to do this? This is yet another mystery to which we will never know the answer.

We also never learnt who was responsible for all the files mysteriously disappearing from the police station. This is because the culprits were possibly policemen, who are too busy investigating us to investigate themselves, and no one else is allowed to investigate them.

Even when they do, their strike rate is poor. Delhi Police has been investigating itself for corruption, for example. On the basis of calls to a helpline in the last four months, seven cases have been filed, at an average rate of 1.75 policemen per month. From this, we can conclude that such an investigation is not really required.

We did learn how much money was riding on Salman Khan, though. It was somewhere between .`200 crore and .`600 crore. Thinking that he might be going to jail, well-muscled middle-aged men across the country felt the sharp pang of hope, and started practising their dance moves.

But while we do not want to jeopardise the income of hardworking dance instructors, they should probably give up. That money will keep riding on him until the case reaches the Supreme Court, in another couple of decades. By which time, he would have finally turned 50.

Meanwhile, we have learnt that the possibility that you may have run over five people is good for your career. We have loved this man, despite the blood on his wheels, and the unpleasant fate of Constable Ravindra Patil. His colleagues loved him too, which is why so many of them have blamed the poor people for sleeping on the road, instead of in penthouses, like normal people.

But the main thing we don’t know is the identity of the victims. Their pictures were not tweeted. We did not light candles. No human interest stories were done on TV. Maybe Salman was right, in the end. There’s one simple thing we need to do, one giant step for mankind, one ring to rule us all. We need to learn about being human.

The above was published in ET

Rule of Law? Really?

Its fashionable to begin articles these days with a disclaimer (it makes one appear more profound), so let me confess too. I am no law graduate, never having enrolled myself in the ” La Fucklety” of Delhi University, as the Law Faculty was lovingly called in my days. My knowledge of law is also limited: I cannot tell a habeas from a corpus and don’t even know the difference between a solicitor and a procurer. But I have of late been getting the feeling that you don’t need to know law to realise that all is not well with our juridical ecology, that the pedestal on which we have ensconced our judiciary has far too many bird droppings on it- in short, it is impossible to make sense of either some of our laws or even some of the judgements of our higher courts.

I am not talking here of the Courts’ refusal to decriminalise homesexuality or to disallow euthanasia in terminal cases, both important facets of a progressive value system which more and more countries are increasingly adopting but we seem to be shying away from because of an ossified mind set. I am not talking either of a government( both past and present) that prefers to flounder in legislations of the last two centuries rather than devise laws for the 21st century. These are serious crevasses in our legal system into which thousands have fallen, but they will have to wait for another day.

I am addressing today the more immediate issue of how we treat different classes of accused, even though we are fed, ad nauseum, the lie that the law is the same for everyone. I am increasingly beginning to feel that the law is putty in the hands of skilled and expensive lawyers and that there is no consistency in the judgements handed down from those lofty heights.

How else does one explain that in this country a convicted and sentenced felon can get bail while a person who is not even convicted is denied bail? Both Mr. Lalu Yadav and Ms. Jayalalitha have been convicted and sentenced but have been released on bail, simply because they have/ are appealing their convictions. Why then have the Talwars not been released, whose circumstances are exactly similar? I am no apologist for Tarun Tejpal but I am one for equality before the law, and therefore I am compelled to wonder why he has been locked up since one year even though he has not been convicted and his trial has a long way to go? Because one set relates to corruption( not heinous) and the other to violent crimes? Then why were Kanimozhi and A Raja imprisoned for a year( their charge was also of corruption)? Because they could influence witnesses? Really? It stretches one’s credulity to believe that the latter two could threaten/bribe witnesses and Lalu and Jayalalitha cannot.

As I said earlier, try as you might it will be impossible to locate any thread of consistency in the law applied in these cases. We are told that each case is different-yes, indeed, but isn’t the law supposed to be the same? I do discern, however, a faint and nebulous thread running through these cases, and perhaps you do too- if you are a politician the law will treat you with kid gloves, and if your case is picked up by Arnab Goswami and Karan Thapar for prime time panel discussions then you are damned! This is a constantly emerging pattern and cannot be a coincidence. The Talwars and Tejpal (and Mr. Pandher-let us not forget this gentleman who has been acquitted in almost all the cases against him but has been reduced to a cadaver after seven years in jail)-they were dead meat the day the prime time mob got after them, and the law obliged.

The grant of parole is another mystery I cannot fathom. Tens of thousands of under-trials cannot even think of getting parole but the privileged have no problem, even though they are convicted and sentenced. A Chautala gets the reprieve on medical grounds and then goes on to campaign for elections: our judicial conscience is assuaged by sending him back to jail AFTER the campaigning period is over! A Manu Sharma (sentenced to life for murder, no less) repeatedly obtains parole for attending funerals, weddings and taking exams. A Sanjay Dutt benefits likewise because his wife is supposed to be ill, though she is otherwise seen partying. Two Italian marines are given a vacation to celebrate Christmas with their families in Italy- if bilateral relations make this imperative, then why charge them in the first place: why not simply accept the crores offered by Italy as compensation and give the two a Presidential pardon? Why first bring them into the legal system and then twist this system and make a mockery of it?

Something else that addles my jurisprudence challenged brain is the constant interventions by higher courts in the proceedings of trial courts, somewhat similar to what Arnab Goswami does to his panelists. With more than 30 million cases pending in various courts as of 2013, should trials be stayed on the flimsiest of applications? A case which immediately comes to mind is the National Herald case against the Gandhi clan. Taking cognizance of a complaint the trial court issued summons to the accused for appearance almost three months ago. The accused immediately approached a higher court (no surprises here!) and got a stay-and added another number to the pendency. The case has not moved forward an inch-which suits the Gandhis just fine. Consider another odd case: Salman Khan was CONVICTED by a trial court in the black buck poaching case two years ago but the sentence was suspended by the Rajasthan High Court without even deciding his appeal. The Rajasthan govt. has challenged this in the Supreme Court. The main appeal is yet to be heard. Years have been unnecessarily added to the final disposal of this case enabling our dabang hero to add a few dozen more crores to his kitty. And this is in addition to the dozens he has already added because his hit-and-run case in Bombay has already taken 12 years and reached nowhere, because mid-way the honourable judge decided to add fresh charges against the thespian, and the whole trial had to be started de nouveau. Why can our courts not realise that delays benefit only the rich and powerful, and then do something about it?

It has become almost the norm, if your pockets are deep enough and your connections extensive enough, to challenge every interim order of a trial court at a higher forum. Appeals are filed against charge-sheets, summons and warrants, framing of charges, summoning of witnesses, nature of evidences, and just about every excuse the fecund mind of a well paid lawyer can conjure up. I am unable to understand why these appeals are entertained at all-why not simply let the trial go on and let these issues become the causus belli in appeal when the trial court passes its final order? I have no difficulty in understanding why the lawyers do so- after all, if you are paid a few lakhs for every appearance( in court) your mind will be as fertile as a vermicomposting pit. But why do the courts allow this to happen?

How is it that politicians who work 16 hours a day while in office and corporates who party for just as long, invariably develop heart/ blood pressure conditions the moment they are sent to jail? And why are our courts so accommodating as to send them to the nearest five star hospital ( in the comfort of which they can plan their next interlocutory appeal)? Why can they not be treated, if treatment is required at all, in the jail hospital or the nearest govt. hospital? After all, govt. hospitals are where law abiding and unconvicted( as yet) citizens like you and I go to-why not these hot shots? If the courts sent them there instead of molly coddling them I can guarantee that, given the conditions of our govt. hospitals, these worthies would be screaming to be sent back to their VIP cells in Tihar and such requests would end once and for all.

And finally, about our laws and law makers. About 150000 Indians die in traffic accidents every year, victims of over speeding, drunk driving, unlicensed drivers, rash driving and other similar conscious acts. And yet the perpetrators of these deaths obtain bail within a few hours and, if convicted at all, can get a maximum sentence of two years only. In other words if you kill somebody with a six inch pistol or a nine inch knife weighing 500 grammes you will get life or death, but if you know your law you would be better advised to kill someone with a four meter projectile weighing two tonnes; chances are you would go scot free or spend just a year or two in jail, even less if you develop high blood pressure or an enlarged prostate or decide to take your bar council exams at this propitious moment. Why cannot the law be amended to make such a deliberate act( it IS deliberate if you drive while drunk or break the speed limit or do not have a driving license) culpable homicide at least?

In the USA such offences come under a separate category termed vehicular homicide, an eminently sensible formulation. What prevents the government from bringing in a similar law, or the Supreme Court from ordering the govt. to do so?

Civilisations cannot exist for long without a system for imparting justice that is fair, equitable, affordable, accessible; a system that is not hijacked by the rich or powerful few. In India our much vaunted justice or judicial system sadly lacks all these attributes. Furthermore, it is not merely laws that ensure the rule of law: its guarantee lies in the intellectual integrity of its practitioners-the plaintiffs, lawyers, the judges; here again there is much that is found wanting.
The time has come for us to tackle this creeping malaise. Otherwise there are Alternative Dispute Redressal Mechanisms( ADRMs) waiting in the wings to take over. These comprise a range of mediums or agencies, none of them compatible with a progressive society: the Taliban, The Khap Panchayat, the D-company, the Vigilante, the Encounter Specialist, the Dirty Harry cop. Their prototypes have already arrived. Its time for us to wake up.

The above is written Ajay Shukla for http://hillpost.in/2014/10/rule-of-law-really/101439/ 

Avay Shukla retired from the Indian Administrative Service in December 2010. He is a keen environmentalist and loves the mountains.....he has made them his home.

An Arun says what the other won't - Shourie levels 'directionless' charge at Modi govt, says Big Three making it 'worse'

New Delhi, May 1: Arun Shourie has fired a volley of shots across Narendra Modi's bows days before the government's first anniversary

.

Shourie, who was Atal Bihari Vajpayee's blue-eyed boy as a disinvestment minister in his government, alleged that Modi's economic policy was "directionless", investments had not picked up and the "Make in India" concept would not take off unless labour reforms were ushered in, and debunked as "hyperbole" the claim of a projected 10 per cent growth rate.

Modi's monogrammed suit and "silence" on minority concerns also drew criticism

The economist-turned-editor-turned-author spoke his mind in an interview with Karan Thapar on the news channel, Headlines Today.

Shourie claimed that the triumvirate of Modi, Amit Shah and Arun Jaitley had "offended" the Opposition and "frightened" party members.

The view was endorsed, albeit silently, by BJP officials who privately said their lips were sealed ever since Shah became the party president. "We were dying to speak out after we lost the Delhi elections. The fear of Shah forced us to keep mum," a party official said.

Shourie charged the trio with creating problems, attempting to resolve them and in the process "making things worse and worse".

He had not opened his mouth in all these months, despite his proven penchant for verbally shredding the BJP leadership. Shourie does not hold a position in the BJP.

However, during interviews in the immediate aftermath of the BJP's electoral triumph, he had given an impression that he looked forward to working directly in the government or in an allied structure.

Nobody in the BJP could tell for sure what Modi thought of Shourie. But it is perceived that even if Modi wished to induct Shourie, others "at the top" reportedly advised him about the pitfalls of taking in an outspoken person who might be a handful to handle

.

BJP insiders fear that while they can fend off similar charges levelled by the Opposition, Shourie's diatribes could not be dismissed airily, especially because he "still inspires awe in certain opinion-makers".

Shourie's articulation also coincides with murmurs among a section of industrialists that the Modi government has not done much on the reforms front.

While Shourie conceded foreign policy was Prime Minister Modi's "great success", he critiqued him for a "lack of clarity and even contradictions" on Pakistan and for "marginalising" foreign minister Sushma Swaraj.

Shourie added that the pin-striped, monogrammed suit Modi wore during President Barack Obama's visit in January was "inexplicable", "incomprehensible" and a "critical mistake".

He was as disapproving of Modi's "silence" on concerns among the min

orities over conversions and stressed that when a former high-ranking police officer like Julio Ribeiro "speaks in anguish, you have to listen".

The retired IPS officer had written in The Indian Express in March that "I feel threatened, not wanted, reduced to a stranger in my own country".

Shourie was not the government's only internal or quasi-internal baiter.

The BJP national executive member and RSS favourite, Subramanian Swamy, warned that unless Modi ordered a probe into the acquisition of SpiceJet airlines by Ajay Singh, a party sympathiser, he would move court "very soon".

"I will continue bombarding the Prime Minister with letters until he acts," Swamy told The Telegraph.

His contention was that the deal between Singh, who was SpiceJet's original promoter in 2004, and the Marans of the DMK political family who had bought the airline in 2010 was opaque.

Swamy's principal charges were that the share transaction was clinched at "arbitrarily low and dud prices" and if the idea was to resurrect the "ailing" SpiceJet and protect its assets, Air India could have taken it over.

Swamy had threatened to legally challenge Modi's commitment to buy the Rafale combat aircraft from France. "There is no need for me to do that because my original objection was against the purchase of 126 planes. That didn't happen. He (the Prime Minister) went to sign but didn't," he said.

To compound the government's discomfiture, Ram Jethmalani released a half-page advertorial in a Delhi paper on April 28, titled, "My frustration about repatriation of black money and contempt for this unpardonable betrayal".

Jethmalani, expelled by the BJP in 2013 for attacking Nitin Gadkari who then helmed the party, fired off 12 questions at Jaitley, insinuating, among other suggestions, that the finance minister had "more than normal cordial relations with (P) Chidambaram" and, therefore, never faulted his predecessor for not recovering black money.

Asked about the bombardment of the veterans, BJP spokesperson and media cell chief Srikant Sharma said: "For the past 10 years, we lived with such attacks and fought them back too."

Sharpshooters like Jethmalani do not have a political constituency but their torment quotient had been proved earlier.

Ironically, Jethmalani's multiple-question tactic is something the BJP is all too familiar with - but from the non-business end of the gun. In the 1980s at the height of the Bofors scandal, Jethmalani used to serve up a daily dose of 10 questions for Rajiv Gandhi in The Indian Express, the newspaper that was edited by Shourie then.

Purti Group (Read Nitin Gadkari) firm violated norms for subsidy from Centre: CAG report

By: Express News Service | New Delhi | Published on:May 1, 2015 2:44 am

A CAG report tabled in Lok Sabha on Thursday has flagged non-compliance by Purti Sakhar Karkhana Limited (PSKL) — a bagasse based co-generation project of the Purti Group in which Union Minister of Road Transport and Highways Nitin Gadkari was once a board member — of conditions for interest subsidy extended to it by the Ministry of New and Renewable Energy (MNRE).

According to the CAG report on “Financing of Renewable Energy Projects by Indian Renewable Energy Development Agency Limited (IREDA)”, in the case of PSKL, the ministry sanctioned Rs 1.92 crore as interest subsidy. Against this, the ministry released Rs 1.37 crore in June 2004 to IREDA on net present value-basis for disbursement to the borrower, PSKL.

The audit found that the borrower did not comply with the conditions for interest subsidy that stipulated the renewable energy project was to operate for a minimum of 10 years after its completion. The project, which was to be commissioned in February 2004, but finally commissioned in March 2007, in June 2009 over to 100 per cent coal-based operation as against up to 25 per cent allowed in the subsidy scheme.

Moreover, though the loan became a non-performing asset in March 2007, the actual benefit from the subsidy amounting to Rs 1.66 crore — including an interest subsidy of Rs 1.17 crore and accrued interest of Rs 49 lakh thereon — was passed on till December 2009. Unutilised interest subsidy of Rs 22 lakh was refunded to the ministry in August 2010.

The CAG found: “The borrower settled its outstanding dues by way of OTS (one-time settlement) in December 2009 for an amount of Rs 71.35 crore against Rs 84.12 crore, but IREDA did not initiate any action for recovery of the interest subsidy of Rs 1.66 crore. Thus, though the borrower violated the terms and conditions for subsidy schemes, IREDA continued giving subsidy.”

According to the CAG report, the IREDA management stated in April 2014 that PSKL settled the account with it and paid the entire loan outstanding as per OTS sanction, and that the implementation of the project was delayed due to various reasons.

On the use of coal for operation of the plant, the management stated that the same needs to be seen on the entire fuel mix used during entire period and not at a particular point of time.

The IREDA management stated that the subsidy of Rs 1.17 crore was passed on to PSKL till the time it settled the dues, and for the remaining period of the loan, the subsidy that was not passed on to PSKL was refunded to the ministry.

As per the national auditor, IREDA further stated that any account becoming an NPA does not necessarily require that the interest subsidy will not be passed. In this case, PSKL paid its dues as per OTS norms. The subsidy was passed up to the quarter ending September 2009.

IREDA also stated that the project had been commissioned and not abandoned requiring the interest subsidy to be recalled.

“The reply of the management may be seen in the context that avoiding default on repayment by the borrower and limited deviation from renewable energy sources (up to 25 per cent) were important components of the scheme, and as such, IREDA cannot change/interpret specific conditions for grant of subsidy of GOI schemes. Further, the OTS proposal was sanctioned on the ground that the project was no longer an RE (renewable energy) project,” the CAG stated.

Purti Group could not be reached for comment.

Green goals for the Delhi aam aadmi

ASEEM SHRIVASTAVA

After earning global recognition for improved air quality only a decade ago, Delhi has now won the unenviable distinction of having the most polluted air among major cities of the world. No resident is immune to its effects; even Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal was treated for chronic respiratory illness.

Recent media reports on Delhi’s foul air have elicited a flurry of advice, but structural problems cannot have individual solutions. They must be tackled institutionally, by rules that set new parameters for consumer and corporate behaviour. Consider one instance. Children, whose young bodies and brains are especially susceptible to harm from dirty air, play outside. You cannot put air purifiers outdoors. Imagine schoolchildren running in playgrounds wearing pollution masks. This is not the stuff of science fiction — it may become reality unless the government takes steps to clean the air.

The All India Institute of Medical Sciences reports a four-fold increase in respiratory ailments such as asthma, since 2007. Gains in air quality from 1998 to 2004, when court judgments ordered conversion of buses and three-wheelers to CNG, have been more than offset by rising emissions from other sources in the last decade, including cars and trucks, power plants, industry, brick kilns, diesel generators, construction, road dust, and open burning of wastes.  Apart from their overall contribution, vehicular emissions are especially important by virtue of their role in the city’s worst pollution exposure levels along its major roadways.

Seven measures

The power of Delhi’s new Aam Aadmi Party government to tackle these is limited, but by no means non-existent. The government cannot on its own upgrade the nation’s fuel standards to Bharat V and VI norms in line with global benchmarks, nor ensure timely completion of bypass roads in neighbouring States. However, there are seven measures that are within its reach, if it finds the political will to act.

First, the new government can move quickly to ensure accurate, real-time reporting of pollution levels in the city. The public has the right to know the facts about the air it breathes.

Second, emergency measures such as closing schools should be implemented whenever pollution levels cross a hazardous threshold. This will not only protect the most vulnerable — children — but also raise public awareness about the problem.

Third, particulate-quality pollution masks should be supplied free of charge to all traffic police, sanitation workers, rickshaw-pullers, auto-rickshaw drivers, construction workers and others who are disproportionately exposed to ambient air pollution on arterial roads, where pollution routinely soars off the charts.

Fourth, Delhi can set stringent emissions standards for trucks entering the city. Those that fail to comply can be required to transfer their loads to trucks that do. This will be inconvenient and costly, but less costly than more deterioration in public health. And it will prompt the trucking industry and manufacturers to get their own environmental houses in order.

Fifth, the misguided national subsidy on diesel — a subsidy intended to benefit the poor and is instead well-harvested by wealthy automobile owners — should be offset in Delhi by an equivalent tax. The Centre for Science and Environment cites World Bank data showing that particulate emissions from diesel engines are 6-10 times higher than for petrol engines.

Sixth, the government should begin a fundamental reorientation of transport infrastructure investment that moves away from private automobiles and towards pedestrians, bicycles and e-rickshaws as well as buses (including state-of-the art bus rapid transit like the successful system in Bogota, the capital of Colombia) and light rail. In a big city, there is really no such thing as private transportation. There are private vehicles, but they can only move on public infrastructure. Public policy should serve people, not cars.

The revenue question

This will cost money. Where will it come from? This brings us to our final measure. Like the Singapore government, Delhi should cap the number of private automobile licenses. As in Singapore, these should be auctioned at the price set by demand, and be valid for a fixed time span (10 years in Singapore). In Singapore, the current auction price is about U.S. $6,000.

Part of the revenue should be returned to all the residents of Delhi in equal payments to every woman, man and child — a transfer from the one per cent who will pay the auction price to the aam aadmi . The other part should be used to fund the green urban infrastructure that truly befits a “world city.”

How much money would this cap and auction bring in? Today, roughly 2.9 million automobiles are registered in Delhi, although the actual number on the roads may be half that much, since the official data include vehicles no longer in circulation, or being used away from the city. If left unchecked, the number will grow rapidly, with projections for 2020 as high as 3.5-4.2 million. Such growth would prove disastrous not only for air quality, especially near arterial roads, but also for traffic congestion. Already cars in Delhi crawl at speeds of less than 4 kilometres per hour 24 per cent of the time they're on the road, and less than 15 km per hour for 40 per cent of the time.

If Delhi caps the number of license plates in 2020 at, say, the current circulating level of around 1.5 million, and auctions them off, these might fetch Rs. 12 lakh (U.S.$20,000) apiece, about one-third of their current Singapore price. Total revenue would come to $30 billion. Over a 10-year license life, this is $3 billion or Rs. 18,000 crore per year. If the cap is ratcheted down over time to 5,00,000 cars, and this pushes the auction price to Rs. 36 lakh (the Singapore level), the amount of revenue would be the same.

If two-thirds of this revenue were returned to Delhi’s residents, this would amount to Rs. 4,800 per person per year, or Rs. 24,000 per year for a family of five, for a projected 2020 population of 25 million — enough to win strong backing from the public. Payments could be made directly into electronic accounts keyed to the new Aadhaar IDs. If the other third, Rs. 6,000 crore per year, were devoted to infrastructure, this would increase the city’s transportation budget by about 150 per cent, accelerating development of alternative transportation that must accompany less reliance on the automobile.

Delhi residents would reap a triple benefit: cleaner air, quicker and safer transportation, and, for all except license-plate buyers, more money in their pockets. The measures recommended above are eminently feasible, given AAP’s handsome mandate. If the new government can achieve these goals, everyone in the capital will be healthier, and Mr. Kejriwal himself will be wheezing and coughing less at his next electoral joust. He might even get re-elected. The costs of failure will be high, not only for the Chief Minister and his party, but for the citizens of Delhi, too.

(Aseem Shrivastava is the co-author of Churning the Earth: The Making of Global India (2012) and James K. Boyce is Professor of Economics at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst.)