Telangana HC’s food for thought to parties in poachgate
The confrontation between the BJP and the Telangana Rashtra Samithi (TRS) government in the state took an unexpected turn recently after the state police raided a farmhouse and caught three persons for allegedly trying to poach four TRS legislators for the saffron camp. TRS president and Chief Minister K Chandrashekar Rao claimed it was part of an elaborate BJP conspiracy to topple his government and made an impassioned plea to the judiciary “to save democracy”. Whatever the merits of his arguments and the evidence on record, what he did next, to put it mildly, was confounding. He sent the evidence, including telephonic conversations, to the Chief Justice of India, judges of the Supreme Court, chief justices and judges of all the high courts, and leaders of several political parties, besides the media.
Why is this problematic? It is accepted beyond any reasonable doubt that disclosure of sensitive information about an ongoing investigation could hinder the administration of justice. This apart, the Supreme Court itself has clarified quite recently that it is against accepting even sealed covers—unless the information contained therein is too sensitive, as it happens in exceptional circumstances. It reasons that such a practice is against the concept of a fair trial. Granted that the TRS government believes it is an aggrieved party and the case at hand is serious in nature. Still, what it has done is nothing short of a self-goal. It has unwittingly given the impression of seeking to influence the case at hand and the judiciary at large.
Telangana High Court Chief Justice Ujjal Bhuyan rightly questioned the government advocate regarding the cover he had received from the TRS chief and disclosed that he had set it aside. The government advocate had to tender an unconditional apology. This entire episode reveals the intensity of the politics at play in the state. Neither the BJP nor the TRS can claim innocence as far as weaning away leaders from other parties is concerned. The less said about the political influence on law enforcement agencies, the better.
Under these circumstances, the high court must be applauded for upholding its principles by directing the special investigation team probing the case to report to a single-judge bench, no one else. It is a reminder to all the parties concerned to let the law take its course.