The Delhi High Court yesterday dismissed the applications of former Prime Minister PV Narasimha Rao and 18 others challenging the charges framed against them in the multi-crore MPs bribery case and asked the accused to face trial in the case.
Upholding the charges framed against the accused by the trial court, Justice Jaspal Singh in his 114-page judgement of far reaching consequences, directed all the accused to appear before the trial court judge on September 19.
Prominent among those whose applications were dismissed yesterday were former Haryana Chief Minister Bhajan Lal, former Karnataka Chief Minister M Veerappa Moily, former cabinet ministers Satish Sharma, Buta Singh, Ajit Singh and Ram Lakhan Singh Yadav..
More From This Section
Significantly, Justice Singh held for the first time in clear terms that MPs and MLAs were public servants.
Surely, members of Parliament would be taken as public servants within the meaning of Section 2(C) of the Prevention of Corruption Act (which deals with the definition of public servant), Justice Singh held.
Justice Singh also dismissed the applications of Rao and his relative V Rajeshwar Rao challenging the trial court decision to grant pardon to JMM leader Shailendra Mahato, who was chargesheeted by CBI along with 20 others in the scam. Mahato had turned approver.
The judge held that there was enough prima facie evidence to frame charges against the accused for giving/accepting bribe to defeat the no-confidence motion tabled by the opposition against government headed by Rao on July 28, 1993.
Though Rao government was in minority, it managed to defeat the no-trust motion by a slender margin of 14 votes (251 for and 265 against) the sordid facts giving rise to these revision petitions against framing of charges show that the secret of success lies, at least with regard to some, in mastering the art of transferring ones own bulging wallets into the eager pockets of others, the judge said while dealing with the facts of the case.
Special judge Ajit Bharihoke, had framed charges against 20 persons on April 25.
The CBI had chargesheeted the accused in three phases alleging that Rao in conspiracy with others had bribed MPs to buy their votes in support of his government to save it during the no-confidence motion of July 1993.
Discussing Article 105(2) of the Constitution, Justice Singh said, members may enjoy all the privileges and immunities which may be necessary to ensure freedom of speech and right of vote inside Parliament.
The judge said under the garb of the immunity provision, MPs cannot acquire a prescriptive right to commit crime. Any such approach would start a thoroughly vicious and destructive process.
Referring to the arguments advanced on behalf of Rao that as the then Prime Minister he was constitutionally bound to save his government, Justice Singh said, it is no job of a Prime Minister to hatch or be a party to such criminal conspiracy.
Power intoxicates the best hearts as wine the strongest heads but then nobody can thrive on corruption. It is froth on water - an inch deep and then the mud. A Prime Minister must not sustain his power and position on the crutches of corruption, the judge said.
It is unfortunate that PV Narasimha Rao thinks he was justified under Article 75(2) of the Constitution. The plea demeans the provision. He is looking out for something which is not there, the judge said holding that the bribes allegedly paid by Rao could not be held to be in discharge of his official duty.