New Delhi: The Supreme Court has today said that the right to file a complaint against a public servant under Prevention of Corruption Act is a constitutional right. The two judges also faulted the Prime Minister's office not taking appropriate action when Janata Party President Subramanian Swamy wrote in, asking for then telecom minister A Raja to be tried for corruption. Here are five big facts on this story:
- The Supreme Court has said that the Prime Minister's Office should not have taken 16 months to decide on Mr Swamy's application, which was related to the telecom scam. Mr Raja is now in jail for allegedly masterminding that swindle, which gave companies mobile network licenses and frequency at throwaway prices. "The concerned officers in the Prime Minister's Office kept the matter pending and then took the shelter of the fact that the CBI had registered the case and the investigation was pending," said the two judges who heard the case.
- The court seemed to suggest that Prime Minister Manmohan Singh should not be blamed for what transpired. "Dr Manmohan Singh is not expected to personally look into the minute details of every case placed before him and has to depend on his advisers and other officers," said the Judges.
- What are the implications? The verdict is an embarrassment for the government, which has been mired in a haze of corruption and financial scams. "A loss of prestige for the Prime Minister," is how Mr Swamy described the verdict to NDTV. "A slap on the face of the government," said the BJP.Advertisement
- What happens next? The Supreme Court has recommended that the government or competent authority should decide within four months on any petition that asks for permission to prosecute a bureaucrat, minister or public official. If there is no response at the end of four months, the assumption should be that proceedings can begin against the official in question. Currently, sanction has to be granted by the union government in the case of central government employees and the state government for those employed in that particular state. In the case of a union minister, it is the President acting on the advice of the Prime Minister.
- The government's response: The verdict, according to the government, is not an indictment but an endorsement of its actions. "We welcome the fact that both the learned Judges have completely vindicated the Prime Minister whilst appreciating the onerous duties of his office. Government is examining their directions regarding the manner in which applications are to be dealt with," said a statement released by the PMO.
COMMENTS
Advertisement
Not In Open Court: Chief Justice On Review Petition In Same-Sex Marriage Supreme Court To Consider Requests To Review Verdict On Same-Sex Marriage "No Error": Supreme Court Rejects Review Petitions Against Article 370 Verdict Barack Obama Wants Joe Biden To Pull Out Of US Presidential Race: Report World's Largest Isolated Tribe Makes Rare Appearance In New Footage Shooter Had Trump's Face Right In Middle Of Crosshairs, Shows New Video Ice-Cream Shop Owner Hospitalised After Being Shot At In Pune: Cops PM Modi Meets Party Staffers At BJP Headquarters NMC Approves 50 MBBS Seats For New Medical College In Odisha Track Latest News Live on NDTV.com and get news updates from India and around the world.