EDITORIAL

Is Bar acting for BJP or RSS to transfer Kathua trial out of J and K 

Written by IWP

The Supreme Court’s saying to shift the Kathua gang-rape and murder trial out of Jammu and Kashmir at the slightest possibility of lack of a fair trial,  seems premeditated that BJP having failed to stall the proceedings at he investigation level made it a point to either give one more chance to CBI or those judicial affiliated to RSS ideology to spoil case like that has happened in case of Macca Masjid criminal case’s fall out by its administrative order.

It is surprising to see that a bench of Chief Justice saying that its “real concern” was to see that a fair trial was conducted. And nice to hear that the trial should be fair for the victim’s family and for the accused, but as to where was the need for the top Court to listen a third party like a Bar Council of India into the administration of the Justice, while the matter is far from the administration of Justice, but at this stage it amounts to only an administrative order

The Bar Council of India (BCI) has been playing for BJP by filing a sealed cover a report before the apex court and what is necessary for BCI to support the demand of the High Court Bar Association at Jammu and Kathua District Court Bar Association for a CBI probe into the case. When it can neither be amicus curie nor  a party to the episode. It is unfortunate to pull legal fraternity into the jurisprudence of such nature.

It is wrong on the BCI part of BCI to state the bar associations had neither obstructed the Crime Branch from filing the charge-sheet in the case nor the advocate representing the victim’s family, while what was necessity for High Court advocates association to suspend her (victim’s council)  from the Bar Association of Jammu and Kashmir High Court. This itself speaks volumes of facts and disparities between the members of the Association. Legal fraternity need to improve its quality in public performance.

As rule of law comes from some corner.  senior advocate P.V. Dinesh, who had brought to the notice of apex court the alleged obstruction by lawyers, rightly objected to the BCI panel’s submissions, saying it was only tasked with the job of finding out whether the local lawyers had obstructed the trial proceedings and instead the panel seemed to have formed opinions on the investigation by the state Crime Branch.

As the apex court is duty bound to supervise and delivery of just justice, it came to the primary concern to provide fair trial in the case and did not want to divert its attention from this aspect. The nation is greatful to her Judiciary to assure the main issue that not be missed. Fair investigation, fair trial, appropriate legal guidance and representation of both the accused and the victim’s family has to be there.

The apex court court felt at this stage not to get into what the Bar Council of India says… If it does, the victim goes away from our attention. Let us not digress from the real issue. The real issue is that how can the Justice be achieved  to the victim through the process in delivery of justice. The apex  court’s concern is to ensure fair trial and procedure to provide protection to the victim’s lawyer so there is no obstruction to justice and finally to transfer the case, if found necessary, but at this stage it is not needed.

If the lawyers’ alleged obstructed the Justice, and are at fault, they would be dealt in accordance with the law including the BCI committee for misleading the apex court. Another senior advocate Indira Jaising, appearing for the victim’s father, urged the court to monitor the trial. The bench of the view that it could examine the prospect of fast-tracking the trial and oversee the progress of the trial.

On April 13, the apex court took suo motu notice of an incident of lawyers of Jammu and Kathua bar associations preventing the victim’s lawyer from appearing in the case. In January, an eight-year-old girl went missing while grazing horses in Rasana forest in Jammu and Kashmir’s Kathua district. Her body was recovered a week later.

The apex court agreed to hear a plea of two of the accused in the case, Sanji Ram and Vishal Jangotra, seeking transfer of the probe to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) besides seeking to be impleaded as parties in the petition filed by the father of the victim for transfer of case from Jammu and Kashmir to Chandigarh. The victim father’s plea for transfer of case would be heard on April 27 by the apex court.

Due to world wide hue and cry on the episode, the case has taken note by Apex Court and the case is under its supervision.

About the author

IWP

Leave a Comment