Opposition's Remedy Is In Political Space, Not In Court: SC While Dismissing Plea Against Alleged Misuses Of ED & CBI

The Supreme Court today dismissed the writ petition filed by 14 opposition parties alleging an alarming rise in the use of coercive criminal processes against opposition political leaders. The Court was of the view that such petitions, in absence of specific facts, cannot be entertained on abstract grounds. The Court suggested that an aggrieved individual can always approach the Courts as per the law.

The Bench of Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and Justice JB Pardiwala was considering a plea moved by the 14 political viz. the INC, DMK, RJD, BRS, Trinamool Congress, AAP, NCP, Shiv Sena (UBT), JMM, JD(U), CPI(M), CPI, Samajwadi Party and J&K National Conference.

Appearing for the political parties, Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, at the outset, submitted that the political parties have not approached the Court in relation to any pending investigation, but are only seeking prospective guidelines.

He further submitted that since 2014, there has been an increase of 600% in cases filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and Enforcement Directorate (ED). The Court was told with statistics that for the ED, 121 political leaders have been probed of which 95% are from the opposition and for the CBI the data is starker.

Singhvi told the Court that the conviction rate in such cases is very poor and that such cases have a chilling effect on the political leaders.

"This is not a petition filed by one or two individuals but by fourteen political parties and now based on statistics, can we say that the investigations should not take place?", asked the CJI.  

"Ultimately, the politicians are also citizens. As citizens, they are amenable to the same laws", the CJI said. The CJI also said that politicians have no rights higher than that of other citizens.

When a submission was made by Dr. Singhvi that the space for the opposition has shrunk and that there are signs of authoritarianism, CJI replied that the remedy to that is in the political space, not the Court.

Further, on the submission that grievousness of the offence should not be a factor to be weighed while considering whether to remand an accused to custody or while granting bail, the CJI asked, "How can we say that regardless of the seriousness of the offence, there cannot be arrest if the offence is punishable with less than seven years of imprisonment?" 

"Political leaders stand on the same footing as the citizens of the country. They are not entitled to a higher immunity", the CJI said. 

The CJI said, "We cannot entertain this...come back to us even in a single case or even group of cases where you say a political leader is targeted and we are certainly here to deal with it. In the absence of any specific facts to lay down any general principles will be dangerous".

The Senior Advocate then sought permission to withdraw the petition at this stage, which was accordingly granted. 

The petition was filed through Advocate Shadan Farasat.

Cause Title: Indian National Congress & Ors. vs Union of India