Dr . Swamy from Day 1 has been saying that the case is bogus & he has said this repeatedly .
& assured Asharam ji Bapu that he would fight his case in the court.
“Bail is a fundamental right of Asaram Bapu and he would soon file an application for the same in the lower court. This case is a first of its kind in India, where a person is behind bars for the last 18 months without the charges against him being proved. He has been targeted for opposing religious conversion,” said Swamy, adding that he would fight his case in the court.Comparing Asaram’s case with those of politicians such as Lalu Prasad and Jayalalithaa, Swamy asked, “When they could be out of jail despite being convicted, why Asaram couldn’t be released? ”
Swamy always wanted to handle this case ,repeatedly saying that TDK (Sonia Gandhi ) was behind this , but couldnot because Ram Jethmalani was handling it initially.
The way in which claims were shouted for making the efforts in the arrest of Sant Shri AsaramJi Bapu by chest beating media channels, antagonistic rhetoric of some activists and political stalwarts that leaves a residue of apprehension about this excessive dutiful nature of them.
The limitless enthusiasm shown by these echelons remained even more after the arrest. The TRP hunting desperation for bringing out something extraordinary which was never unfolded about Sant Asharam Ji Bapu crossed all the boundaries where press reporters overjoyed their liberty without any fear of liability.
The wide impact of this was observed in the burden of denounced feelings and gloating pronunciations for him in common society being much heavier than empathy suppressed under the atrocities by local police on his supporters.
Perhaps this concocted depiction of Bapu and his organisation in numerous TV stories couldn’t leave even adjudications untouched or; if utter in another way, may be some motivation kept them vindictive as it has been busted out in previous matters too. Though the apex court was looked unfavourable when was approached in last October and negated the media influence over the court proceedings by saying in reason of inadequate instances but there are enough accumulation which deals with this apprehension. We will look at these in below paragraphs.
Like the dismissal of the plea for quashing out the charges and that was fought at consecutive courts and rejected after keeping the orders reserved for the days. But that was seemed quite convincing to the judge on argument day after sheer arguments upon the law points regarding suspicious course of FIR registered, negative medical report, contradictory bulletins on TV cameras by investigating officers which was saying that no rape charges.
The reluctant and hateful reflection of current judiciary setup in this case is something that certainly exists and cannot be denied.
Second, deferment of the hearing on bail petitions repeatedly for the date after date and finally denied by saying in the reason of tempering the evidences or threatening calls to family and witnesses which were referred from the media reports.
A lot more, not to allow the medical treatment and food facilities initially to Bapu which could be facilitated for him as it is the statutory right of trial of every under trial prisoner and also was in abiding the law under Rajasthan prisoners’ act. For this, he had to fight a tough battle against the inhuman attitude of Jodhpur Police that was highly observed i.e. not preferring a right kind of ailment and food for him even after medical recommendations were made for this. The tiny relief of bail for all co-accused and the Ayurvedic ailment and home-made food to Bapu are the only ones which could be counted as an outcome in his favour after the struggle of several writs filed and attempted repeatedly for same causes during the last one year. Therefore, the reluctant and hateful reflection of current judiciary setup in this case is something that certainly exists and cannot be denied, which further insinuates under working of invisible strings controlled by some political levers.
Nevertheless, Bapu who is currently lodged at Central Jail, Jodhpur, is exercising his legal recourse against the charges of rape, attempt to rape, sexual harassment, trafficking of person, criminal intimidation, wrongful confinement, abetment, criminal conspiracy including the tough sections of POCSO act in which one needs to take the onus burden to refute that of having any mental state to commit the crime on child. These all serious charges have been consolidated in the charge-sheet filed by Jodhpur Police, which bounds him to prosecute in a special court. Last April he challenged the aforesaid charges in Jodhpur High court to quash out by looking at several flaws like the doubtful circumstances in which the FIR was registered and its deviated procedure; n numbers of contradictions in the statements of complainants and witnesses. Any sign of hymen impairment and assault brutality was also denied in medical report. Further, the imposition of the charges such like intimidation, trafficking, confinement, abetment conspiracy etc. can be deemed only to fortify the prehension for which the prosecution and investigation agency have always been with backup to amass all the eventuality and make him accused of malign modus operandi.
But on the imposition of the charges, prosecution’s claim of establishing the balance in the prospect of any crime but without any stretch of imagination is merely a false cry on which they want to build up the base with full of complexities during the court proceedings in future so that tyranny over a Hindu Guru can be enjoyed in meantime and the same play has been attempted till today in the case which has kept the reality shielded behind it. It can be easily asserted that ostensible eventuality is altogether the creation of sympathy worthy statements & versions of complainant and her parents, malicious rhetoric by echelons, pre-planned protests & demonstrations, planted fake revelations on modus operandi by Ashram’s ex-aids, a kind of parallel investigation by media reporters which is chased later by police, concocted depiction through speculated facts under police custody and arbitrarily appearance of suspicious ladies shown on TV channels as several more out of victims. All these were telecasted unceasingly by mainstream media channels during the days of arrest till judicial custody. This havocking coverage set the dimensions for investigation agency which they had to just align in to their exercise of investigation and formulated the aforesaid charges. We can also recall the same kind of blunder in 2008’s matter of Gurukul students death case when the cloud of the outcry that deaths of the students were caused of malpractice of black-magic in Ashram, it enhanced up to the level of investigation by an appointed commission, and later, not even a single media house turned up to reply on the notice for submitting the evidence of black magic to commission. The confined and lopsided attempts in its investigation by Jodhpur Police just to substantiate the eventuality for which they were looking for, is that concealed aspect on which the entire cabal is pivoted. Thus all the controlled and pre-destined investigations further funnelled through another depraved one – the local judiciary which allowed toset these on record and performed cruel right from the outset. For an example, decline the tiniest need to provide some routine medicines and a woollen bed in the December’s winter of Jodhpur.
But, finally, the plea for quashing out the charges was rejected by Rajasthan High Court by passing an order which clearly expressed out the intention of the vendetta and cannot be expected from such higher level pious establishments for the justice. The order passed by honourable judge was consisted of the hateful words, discrete arguments which lack the judicial objectivity and the abandon of words chosen to write the order.
For the purpose of this post, here’s the reiteration of some portions (along with the context) of order –
The derogatory word “infamous” was remarked in preface where the petitioner parties were introduced.
“The present criminal revisions relate to the famous case of the infamous Asharam@Ashumal and others”
The use of disparaging word infamous as an adjective to Bapu reflects non-neutral stand of local judiciary and also a clear abandon of judiciary discipline. Moreover, the use of such word in this subjudice matter shows either the candid influence on the discrimination of adjudicator due to concocted media telecast or the loss of restraint willingly to satisfy the disgust of behind the curtain string pullers. This implies a peccable violation of the guidelines laid down in previous judgments by apex court of the country.
SC has written in the judgement of the A.M. Mathur v. Pramod Kumar Gupta & Ors. in 1990 –
“Judges have the absolute and unchallengeable control of the Court domain. But they cannot misuse their authority by intemperate comments, undignified banter or scathing criticism of counsel, parties or witnesses.”
“the Court has the inherent power to act freely upon its own conviction on any matter coming before it for adjudication, but it is a general principle of the highest importance to the proper administration of justice that derogatory remarks ought not to be made against persons or authorities whose conduct comes into consideration unless it is absolutely necessary for the decision of the case to animadvert on their conduct.”
Further, in the order, HC borrowed an analogy from the previous supreme order in Rajveer@Raju and anr. v. State of Haryana, 2011 to refer the meeting out of the eventuality when a charge of lesser offence has been framed and the court in its ultimate conclusion finds the accused guilty of graver offence.
Therefore, the analogy was further extended to justify the necessary addition of ‘rape’ charges to the charges of ‘attempt to rape’ even after it was not made out in the records in Bapu’s matter. This impugned order was also extended to apply in other sexual assault cases alive in Rajasthan. Moreover, one astonishing point emerges out here and that is, above mentioned order in Rajveer@Raju case has been overruled by Supreme Court in his next order and allowed to apply after with some precautions. Now the devoid of this over-ruling when referring the SC order by HC cannot be an unusual and if it is so, then it is very miserable and incompetent condition at our HC level. Further, releasing out of such order with an extension to apply in all of the cases of same nature is likely to say the misuse of the inherent power of the court.
The below argument was mentioned to decline the any cropping of the charges and in its reasons, was said that charges are framed to cover widely all the eventuality of the incidence and those can be set aside during the cross-examinations if it is found incorrect.
“A person may wear a shirt slightly larger than his size but he cannot wear a shirt which is smaller to his size. Minor irregularities, if found in charges, do not vitiate the trial unless they have caused the prejudice to the case of the accused.”
Vice-versa the addition in the charges can be happened for the conviction if find during the trial (enough citation available in numerous cases in past). If we extrapolate meaning of latter sentence, the above citation by adjudicator is more a philosophical rationale than a legalese which does not has any judicial objectivity and definitely floats towards prejudice to the accused while denying of not happening so, very cleverly!Also, the citation does not fit in the agreement with the principle of judicial restraint and discipline which SC narrates in A.M. Mathur v. Pramod Kumar Gupta & Ors. in 1990 –
“Judicial restraint and discipline are as necessary to the orderly administration of justice as they are to the effectiveness of the army. The duty of restraint, this humility of function should be a constant theme of our judges. This quality in decision making is as much necessary for judges to command respect as to protect the independence of the judiciary. Judicial restraint in this regard might better be called judicial respect; that is, respect by the judiciary. Respect to those who come before the Court as well to other co-ordinate branches of the State, the Executive and Legislature. There must be mutual respect. When these qualities fail or when litigants and public believe that the Judge has failed in these qualities, it will be neither good for the judge nor for the judicial process.”
Further, the HC shares its incapability, vagueness on power limitations and anxious condition through citation of the Supreme Court order in Munna Devi v. State of Rajasthan, 2002 criminal writ petition in the order. This is another knack denial by the court, despite of exercising the power to make this verdict generalized to all cases in its single head decision. In entire order document, it is reiterated that the court does not understand it as fair to amend the charges when the trial has already been started and it will lead to prejudice to the complainant. The reluctance of the court for not to grasp the subject at the end is preconceived one where it allowed to develop the situation to spontaneous start of trial before the verdict on subject plea which was deferred to hear so many times at same court.
The following is the concluding paragraph in which court strictly negated to relook at age determination of complainant so that tough sections of POCSO could be repealed and this was quite relevant to raise the reservation on investigation agency who has been escaping to bring such documents on records which say the age of complainant is not minor. The investigation agency never had an attitude to do a balance investigation on both sides of the ‘eventuality’ spectrum. Further,
“The case has been argued on behalf of the accused-petitioners on so many counts as mentioned in their memo of revisions but this Court is not inclined to appreciate the evidence in the case at the stage of charge because that will seriously prejudice the cause of justice in the case and hence without commenting upon the merits of the case, it can be said that the charges framed by the trial court against all the petitioners do not deserve to be disturbed but the trial court is also left free to amend or alter the charges as and when required in furtherance of the cause of justice to do complete justice with the parties”
Indeed, the rigid stance of the court in saying no to disturbance in the charges framed hogs towards the benefit to the prosecution side and ultimately set prejudicialness to the accused as several key questions have left undecided before the start of this expeditious trial which definitely would vitiate the trial.
Finally, this is the case where several political and religious opponents would be seen satisfied and happy if it goes in the conviction to Bapu and all the proceeding like it has been happened till today; only raise the bar of their appeasement. Hence the deceitful circumstances being moulded in an oblique way certainly leaves us much closer to affirmation of this demur.
Can the complete justice be expected when everything has set to perform in a disguised and control way?
Ishwar par hame bharosha hai. Ishwar ki shristi me der hai par andher nahi hai. Ha, hame prayas pura karna chahiye paristhiti ko badalne ke liye. Kyonki naai apne baal khud nahi kaatta, doctor apna operation khud nahi karta, aur vakil apna case khud nahi ladta aise hi sant apne liye koi prayas nahi karte.