- SPEAK UP STAND UP SHOW UP FOR JUSTICE
- SPECIAL COURTS SHOULD EXTRICATE THEMSELVES FROM EXHIBITING UNWARRANTED LOYALTY TO THE DESIGNATED AGENCIES, DETRIMENTAL TO THE CONSTITUTIONAL MORALITY
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
THE DESK : ELURU :
Umpteen number of Special Courts are constituted under various enactments, to enforce them and for the effective and expeditious, disposal of the cases. Which does not mean that the Special Courts are armed with extra- ordinary jurisdiction, even to bypass, the constitutional mandate and established Rule of Law. Nowadays, a new syndrome of exhibiting loyalty, to the actions of Specially constituted agencies creeped into the portals of the Special Courts, in sensitive to the constitutional morality, at the costs and interests of the fundamental rights guaranteed.
His Lordship Mr.Justice Mahabir Singh Sindhu of the Hon’ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh, while entertaining Writ Petition in Balwant Singh’s Case, having taken cognizance of several mandatory proecedural lacunae, in passing of the Orders, routinely by the Special PMLA Court, made caustic remarks that Judges of PMLA Courts are not supposed to act like Extended Arm of ED and quashed the Orders passed in such a cavalier manner. The said Hon’ble P & H High Court also remarked that the Orders passed are neither coherent nor any Legally sustainable reasons, negating the salutory protection emanating from Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
In fact, I had to confront a strange situation of marking the statement recorded U/s.164 Cr.P.C by a Special POCSO Court, despite the objection raised. Even though the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Ram Kishan Singh Vs. Harmit kaur and Anr and Hon’ble High Court of A.P in Guruvindapalli Anna Rao’s Case held that Statement recorded by the Magistrate is not a substantial piece of evidence, but it is only a previous statement and need not be marked as Exhibit.
In fact, previously, Judgments are circulated, deprecating, the practice of marking the Statements U/s. 164 of Cr.P.C and reading them as evidence and placing reliance on them. The said obnoxious practice has been continuing unabated, indicating the inertia of the Higher Judiciary, in exercising its jurisdiction, under Article 227 of Constitution of India. Whenever any obnoxious procedural practices are noticed, it is not only the duty of the members of the Legal fraternity, but also the Constitutional Courts exercising their superintendent powers, to take appropriate steps to curb the acts of causing miscarriage of justice. Otherwise, justice will be the first casualty.
GOTTUMUKKALA RONALD RAJU B.Sc., M.A., M.L., ADVOCATE, HIGH COURT OF AP./T.S.
Mobile No: 94403 75533
E-Mail ID: ronaldraju94@gmail.com
HYDERABAD, GUNTUR, ELURU
