| Headnote |
DELHI SPECIAL POLICE ESTABLISHMENT ACT, 1946:s. 6-A - Constitutional validity of - Requirement of approval of the Central Government to conduct inquiry or investigation where the allegations of commission of an offence under the PC Act, 1988 relate to the employees of the Central Government of the level of Joint Secretary and above - Held: Classification which is made in s. 6-A on the basis of status in the Government service is not permissible under Article 14 as it defeats the purpose of finding prima facie truth into the allegations of graft, which amount to an offence under the PC Act, 1988 - There cannot be sound differentiation between corrupt public servants based on their status because irrespective of their status or position, corrupt public servants are corrupters of public power - The classification made in s. 6-A neither eliminates public mischief nor achieves some positive public good, rather it advances public mischief and protects the crime-doer - There is no rational basis to classify the two sets of public servants differently on the ground that one set of officers is decision making officers and not the other set of officers - If there is an accusation of bribery, graft, illegal gratification or criminal misconduct against a public servant, then the status of offender is of no relevance - The result of the impugned legislation is that the very group of persons, namely, high ranking bureaucrats whose misdeeds and illegalities may have to be inquired into, would decide whether the CBI should even start an inquiry or investigation against them or not - There will be no confidentiality and insulation of the investigating agency from political and bureaucratic control and influence because the approval is to be taken from the Central Government which would involve leaks and disclosures at every stage - As a necessary corollary, the provision contained in s.26 (c) of the Act 45 of 2003 to that extent is also declared invalid - Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 14 - Central Vigilance Commission Act, 2003 - s.26(c).s. 6A - Protection to a class of the Government officers of the level of Joint Secretary and above - Reasonableness of classification - Held: The classification is not based on intelligible differentia when one set of bureaucrats of Joint Secretary level and above who are working with the Central Government are offered protection u/s. 6-A while the same level of officers who are working in the States do not get protection though both classes of these officers are accused of an offence under PC Act, 1988 and inquiry/investigation into such a/legations is to be carried out - The provision in s. 6-A, thus, impedes tracking down the corrupt senior bureaucrats as without previous approval of the Central Government, the CBI cannot even hold preliminary inquiry much less an investigation into the allegations - The protection in s. 6-A has propensity of shielding the corrupt - The object of s. 6-A, that senior public servants of the level of Joint Secretary and above who take policy decision must not be put to any harassment, side-tracks the fundamental objective of the PC Act, 1988 to deal with corruption and act against senior public servants - Thus, the object of s. 6-A itself is discriminatory.CONSTITUTION OF IND/A, 1950:Article 14 - Challenge to the constitutional validity of a law enacted by the legislature - Held: Court to keep in view that there is always a presumption of constitutionality of an enactment, and a clear transgression of constitutional principles must be shown - The two dimensions of Article 14 in its application to legislation and rendering legislation invalid are discrimination, based on an impermissible or invalid classification and excessive delegation of powers; conferment of uncanalised and unguided powers on the executive, whether in the form of delegated legislation or by way of conferment of authority to pass administrative orders - If such conferment is without any guidance, control or checks, it is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution - The Court also needs to be mindful that a legislation does not become unconstitutional merely because there is another view or because another method may be considered to be as good or even more effective, like any issue of social, or even economic policy - It is well settled that the courts do not substitute their views on what the policy is - Legislation.Article 14 - Reasonable classification - The Constitution permits the State to determine, by the process of classification, what should be regarded as a class for purposes of legislation and in relation to law enacted on a particular subject - There is bound to be some degree of inequality when there is segregation of one class from the other - However, such segregation must be rational and not artificial or evasive - In other words, the classification must not only be based on some qualities or characteristics, which are to be found in all persons grouped together and not in others who are left out but those qualities or characteristics must have a reasonable relation to the object of the legislation - Differentia which is the basis of classification must be sound and must have reasonable relation to the object of the legislation - If the object itself is discriminatory, then explanation that classification is reasonable having rational relation to the object sought to be achieved is immaterial.PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION ACT, 1988:Object of - Held: PC Act, 1988 is a special statute and its preamble shows that it has been enacted to consolidate and amend the law relating to the prevention of corruption and for the matters connected therewith - It is intended to make the corruption laws more effective by widening their coverage and by strengthening the provisions - It came to be enacted because Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 as amended from time to time was inadequate to deal with the offences of corruption effectively - The new Act now seeks to provide for speedy trial of offences punishable under the Act in public interest as the legislature had become aware of corruption amongst the public servants - Corruption corrodes the moral fabric of the society and corruption by public servants not only leads to corrosion of the moral fabric of the society but also harmful to the national economy and national interest, as the persons occupying high posts in the Government by misusing their power due to corruption can cause considerable damage to the national economy, national interest and image of the country.CENTRAL VIGILANCE COMMISSION ACT, 2003: Object of - Discussed.INVESTIGATION:Criminal justice system mandates that any investigation into the crime should be fair, in accordance with law and should not be tainted - It is equally important that interested or influential persons are not able to misdirect or highjack the investigation so as to throttle a fair investigation resulting in the offenders escaping the punitive course of law - These are important facets of rule of law - Breach of rule of law amounts to negation of equality under Article 14 - The argument that rule of law is not above law and cannot be a ground for invalidating legislations overlooks the well settled position that rule of law is a facet of equality under Article 14 and breach of rule of law amounts to breach of equality under Article 14 and, therefore, breach of rule of law may be a ground for invalidating the legislation being in negation of Article 14 - Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 14. |
