Sanjiv Bhatt, Police and Politics.

I have just seen the following article on a popular website.
It is most distressing and dangerous.

IPS officer Sanjiv R. Bhatt suspended

Posted by: “Anjlee Pandya”
anjleepandya@gmail.com
Fri Aug 12, 2011 10:54 pm (PDT)

I have never met Sanjiv Bhatt.
In terms of service, he is junior to me by 20 years. I was offered the Indian Police Service, but I joined the Indian Revenue Service for the simple reason my mother did not like the idea of my joining the police force.
But Sanjiv Bhatt’s conduct is hardly something which can be justified by any one – either morally or legally.

Members of the All India Services – the IAS and the IPS are a privileged lot. They are appointed by the Central Government and allotted to a particular state. They draw their salaries and allowances from that state. Even though they enjoy certain safeguards against dismissal, etc., they are under the day to day administrative control of the concerned state.

Of late, IPS officers like Sanjiv Bhatt have been mixing up politics with their official duties, hogging the media and making all kinds of allegations.

Serving officers should not address the media unless the conduct rules permit them to do so. Of course, they can and should approach the High Courts and Supreme Court, wherever necessary.

The several allegations in the above paragraphs against Sanjiv Bhatt are prima facie sufficient to justify disciplinary against him. He must remember that if he himself is thoroughly indisciplined, how can he expect, demand and get unsquinted obedience from his subordinates.
They will behave in the same irresponsible manner and the system would collapse.
And if the allegations are correct, no court can support his stand.

First, before fighting against the State, Sanjiv Bhatt or any other officer himself should be clean in all respects.
Otherwise, he will end up a hapless loser the same way as Baba Ramdev.

Sanjiv Bhatt, you are treading on dangerous turf.
You will end up a sad loser.
And in the end, it will be your wife and children who will suffer.

This is a bizarre story of a high handed lady magistrate in Mumbai who travelled in local travels in Mumbai without paying for her tickets.

Arundhati Ashok Walavalkar was appointed a Metropolitan Magistrate in Bombay on 28.5.1992.
She travelled between Mulund and Dadar on First Class.
She was caught by the Railway Ticket Checkers on at least three occasions.

She behaved offensively with the Railway officials.
The Railway authorities reported the matter to the Bombay High Court.
The High Court found her guilty of ticketless travel and compulsorily retired her on 27 September 2000.

The matter went up to the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court decided against her

in CIVIL APPEAL NO. 6966 OF 2004

ARUNDHATI ASHOK WALAVALKAR …. Appellant

Versus

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA …. Respondent

Order Passed by: Dr. MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA, J.
Date of Order: 13 January 2011 

The Supreme Court observed:

“1. This appeal was filed by the appellant herein being aggrieved by the judgment and order passed by the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court dismissing the writ petition filed by the appellant herein.

“3. The allegation against the appellant was that she had travelled without tickets on 21.2.1997, 13.5.1997 and also on 5.12.1997 when she was caught. The charges here not only related to such incidents of ticketless travelling but also about misusing her official identity card and for making unnecessary scene on the Railway platform and giving threats to the Railway staff which was considered to be misconduct unbecoming of a judicial officer as per Rule 3(iii) of the Maharashtra Civil Services Conduct Rules, 1979.

“21. In this connection, we may also refer to a letter written by her on 8.12.1997 to  the General Manager, Central Railway, Mumbai. The said letter was admittedly written by her and it reads as follows:-

“I would like to mention to you that sometimes, I am required

to enter into your local Trains to reach my Court in time, as the

vehicle given to us is a pooling one which takes a very long

time due to unexpected traffic on the roads or break downs.

During such occasions, I am unable to buy tickets because of

short of time and consequently it had happened so, that I had

to face your nagging ticket collectors. Your lady ticket

collectors at Dadar instead of understanding our difficulties

have further harassed us in the most insulting manner and

this has left a deed scar in our mind. If you care to know how

nasty your people could be, you may depute a representative

to whom we can explain the facts.

I am aware that the Metropolitan Magistrates handling the

matters of any railway police station on central line get first

class free pass right from Nagpur to Igapturi. Even the staff

attached to such Magistrates also get free passes. We also

attend to the work of railways on Saturdays, Sundays and

holidays. Are we therefore, not entitled, at least to stand in

the first class compartments of local trains only for the

purpose of reaching our Courts in time during such

emergencies ? Please do the needful in this matter urgently

by giving necessary instructions to the ticket collectors so that

we are not humiliated by your ticket collectors on this count

and made to pay fine.

If you are of the negative opinion, that even this little courtesy

cannot be extended to us, please communicate to me, so that I

am prepared for such eventualities. Your early response

would be highly appreciated.”
“29. …..This is the case of judicial officer who was required to conduct herself with dignity and manner becoming of a judicial officer. A judicial officer must be able to discharge his/her responsibilities by showing an impeccable conduct. In the instant case, she not only travelled without tickets in a railway compartment thrice but also complained against the ticket collectors who accosted her, misbehaved with the Railway officials and in those circumstances we do not see how the punishment of compulsory retirement awarded to her could be said to be disproportionate to the offence alleged against her. In a country governed by rule of law, nobody is above law, including judicial officers. In fact, as judicial officers, they have to present a continuous aspect of dignity in every conduct. If the rule of law is to function effectively and efficiently under the aegis of our democratic setup, Judges are expected to, nay, they must nurture an efficient and enlightened judiciary by presenting themselves as a role model. Needless to say, a Judge is constantly under public glaze and society expects higher standards of conduct and rectitude from a Judge. Judicial office, being an office of public trust, the society is entitled to expect that a Judge must be a man of high integrity, honesty and ethical firmness by maintaining the most exacting standards of propriety in every action. Therefore, a judge’s official and personal conduct must be in tune with the highest standard of propriety and probity. Obviously, this standard of conduct is higher than those deemed acceptable or obvious for others. Indeed, in the instant case, being a judicial officer, it was in her best interest that she carries herself in a decorous and dignified manner. If she has deliberately chosen to depart from these high and exacting standards, she is appropriately liable for disciplinary action.

30. We fully agree with the conclusions arrived at by the disciplinary authority……..”

Well said and well decided.
The Magistrate has been rightly punished.
But the public expects the same standards from their political leaders…leaders who lead the nation’s destiny.

Such leaders should never say they are innocent till proved guilty.
If the needle of suspicion – supported by loss to the nation, loss to the public is ever raised, they should be thrown over board.

After all, to err is human.
But to accept a mistake and correct it is divine.

In this glaring case of unprecedented injustice, the Supreme Court Judges made serious mistakes, not once, but three times. As a result, three innocent persons languished in jail for several months.

October 1991

In October 1991, a Sessions Court in Shivpuri, Madhya Pradesh convicted Bhoja, Pooran, Balvir and Raghuvir (along with four others  - Sugar Singh, Laxman, Onkar and Ramesh) and sentenced them to 6 years imprisonment on charges of rioting and culpable homicide not amounting to murder.

January 2003

The eight convicts appealed to the Gwalior bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court In January 2003, the High Court acquitted all the accused.

The Madhya Pradesh Government accepted the acquittal of Bhoja, Pooran, Balvir and Raghuvir; but filed appeal before the Supreme Court against the acquittal of the other four.

November 7, 2008

A bench of the Supreme Court comprising Justices Arijit Pasayat, C.K. Thakker and L.S. Panta set aside the High Court order and held all the eight accused guilty in the case, even though

• The Madhya Pradesh High Court had acquitted  Bhoja, Pooran, Balvir and Raghuvir;
•  The Madhya Pradesh Government had accepted the verdict and had not filed any appeal against it, and
• The issue relating to these four persons – Bhoja, Pooran, Balvir and Raghuvir – was not before the Supreme Court (Bhoja, Pooran, Balvir and Raghuvir were not even parties to the case).

Bhoja, Pooran and Balvir surrendered and were put back inside the jail.

March 9, 2010

Bhoja, Pooran, Balvir and Raghuvir  filed a review petition for reconsideration of the matter. The matter went to the same bench, which through another quirk of fate, released the four other persons instead of Bhoja, Pooran, Balvir and Raghuvir.

April 20, 2010

On April 20, Aftab Ali Khan, Advocate for the four accused pointed out the mistake to a bench comprising of  the Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan and three senior most judges, Justices S H Kapadia, Altamas Kabir and R V Raveendran. The Bench promised to examine the matter in May.

April 22, 2010

This matter was widely reported by the media.
In an unprecended move, the Bench comprising of the Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan and three senior  most judges, Justices S H Kapadia, Altamas Kabir and R V Raveendran, convened on an urgent basis, called the lawyers and passed order  “acquitting” Bhoja, Puran and Balbir, who had been languishing in jail due to two wrong consecutive orders passed by the Supreme Court in November 2008 and March 2010.

My humble request

At last a serious error has been corrected and justice has been done to the accused. Or has it been done ?

**    Was it not the duty of the Govt. prosecution to point out on each occasion that the courts orders were wrong, that wrong persons were being sent to jail ?

***  Was it not the duty of the Judges to do their home work ?

*** Was it not the duty of the Present Bench of the Supreme Court  to award damages on their own ?

Do the Supreme Court judges really expect the poor accused to engage in one more round of litigation for damages. Would they have the money and energy to file a case at all.

The Supreme Court should have been magnanimous to award damages to the wronged persons. They can pay such damages from the funds of the Supreme Court or direct the Govt. to pay the same.

But in my humble view, the Supreme Court should award the damages.
That is the least they can do now to rectify all the wrongs done.

Dr. Binoy Gupta, Retd. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai