New Delhi: The Supreme Court junked a petition filed by fourteen political parties alleging that the Centre is misusing probe agencies like CBI and ED to muzzle dissent by the opposition leaders, The Indian Express reported.
A division bench of Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and Justice JB Pardiwala observed that the court could not issue directions without a factual context. It continued that without any specific facts, the court laying down a general principle of law is a dangerous proposition, TIE reports.
Supreme Court refuses to entertain plea by 14 political parties alleging misuse of probe agencies by the centre. Says that in the absence of specific facts, for the court to lay down general principle of law is a dangerous proposition. @IndianExpress
— Ananthakrishnan G (@axidentaljourno) April 5, 2023
The bench stressed that politicians are citizens and cannot enjoy any higher protection, and the aggrieved individual politicians can approach the court concerned for appropriate remedy.
The bench told Singhvi that when political parties argue that there is a chilling effect on the Opposition due to the CBI and ED cases against the leaders of the political parties, then the answer lies in the political space and not in courts.
Chief Justice Chandrachud said general principles of law couldn't be laid down in the absence of specific facts and added, "We can't lay down guidelines merely on the basis of some statistics relating to politicians".
The political parties sought guidelines to fulfil and realise the guarantee of personal liberty entrenched in Article 21 of the Constitution for all citizens, including those targeted for exercising their right to political dissent and for performing their duties as the political Opposition.
The plea submitted that investigating agencies such as the CBI and the ED are being increasingly deployed in a selective and targeted manner with a view to completely crush political dissent and upend the fundamental premises of representative democracy. The petition has been drawn and filed by advocate Shadan Farasat.
"As for arrest and remand, the petitioners seek that the triple test (whether a person is a flight risk, or whether there is a reasonable apprehension of the tampering of evidence, or of the influencing/intimidation of witnesses) be used by police officers/ED officials and courts alike for the arrest of persons in any cognisable offences except those involving serious bodily violence. Where these conditions are not satisfied, alternatives like an interrogation at fixed hours or at most house arrest be used to meet the demands of investigation," the plea said.
With inputs from IANS