The Hindu : National : Supreme Court rejects plea for CBI probe into Acharya's arrest

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Friday, Nov 26, 2004

National

National

Supreme Court rejects plea for CBI probe into Acharya's arrest

By Our Legal Correspondent

NEW DELHI, NOV. 25. The Supreme Court today dismissed, at the admission stage, a public interest litigation (PIL) petition filed by a former BJP Rajya Sabha member, B.P. Singhal, seeking a CBI probe into the arrest of the Kanchi Sankaracharya, Sri Jayendra Saraswathi, by the Tamil Nadu police on November 11.

A Bench, comprising Chief Justice R.C. Lahoti and Justice G.P. Mathur, pointed out that when none of the accused or the affected persons had come to the court, the petitioner, being a third party, had no locus standi to invoke extraordinary jurisdiction of the apex court.

The Bench said: "We are not satisfied that the petitioner fulfilled the test of locus standi for filing this petition. Moreover, the petitioner has no personal knowledge about the incident and all his averments are based on newspaper reports. Neither any document has been annexed to the petition nor any effort made by the petitioner to verify facts."

The Bench noted that the petitioner had not even filed the copy of the FIR in the case against the Acharya which could have enabled the Bench to formulate an opinion regarding the fairness of the investigation.

Further, the Bench pointed out that the petitioner had stated that he was not seeking any relief for the Acharya. The petitioner had also not been joined by any of the accused persons in the (Sankararaman murder) case in which the Sankaracharya had been cited as an accused, the Bench said. It also noted that the petitioner had not taken care to verify the averments. None of the accused who would be the affected party by ordering a CBI probe into the matter had come to the court.

The decisions of the apex court cited by the petitioner to advance his case would not support him as in all these matters the petitions were filed either by the accused or by the affected persons and orders were passed in accordance with the facts and circumstances of those cases, the Bench said and dismissed the petition in limine.

`Hardship to people'

Appearing for the petitioner, counsel Harvir Pratap Sharma submitted that a large section of the people had been affected by the arrest of the Acharya and they felt that the State was not conducting a fair investigation. It was also causing economic hardship to the people at large as many political and religious organisations were calling for bandhs and dharnas in protest against the treatment meted out to the seer. On the question of locus standi, he cited many earlier judgments to drive home the point that the court had entertained a PIL from third parties and granted relief by ordering a CBI probe.

Mr. Singhal, a retired Director General of Police, in his petition alleged that the State Government had deliberately and with mala fide intentions violated the human rights and the fundamental rights of the seer guaranteed under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution by arresting him at night.

Contending that there was no material to justify the arrest of the Acharya, he alleged that the Tamil Nadu police had refused to supply copies of relevant documents, including the FIR, on the basis of which he was arrested. Besides seeking a CBI probe, Mr. Singhal sought a direction against "attempts by the State Government to take over the Kanchi Mutt."

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

National