FROM death row to a potential assistant commissioner of Delhi Police? That's not as remote a possibility as it mightseem, thanks to the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) decision (under direction from the Supreme Court) of December 14, directing that Balbir Singh, acquitted in the Indira Gandhi assassination case, be reinstated in service.
But while Singh's relief is obvious as he once again dreams of re-building his life, and his endorsement of the apex court emphatic ("the Supreme Court has once again proved that it is the only institution that can deliver justice and remain immune to pressure"), the CAT decision has had some rather significant consequences.
The first among these, according to legal experts, is the fact that the Balbir Singh case has seen the "implementation" of the "path-breaking" A.K. Kaul vs Union of India judgement delivered by the apex court on April 9, 1995, regarding the powers of the President to sanction the dismissal of a government servant without a departmental inquiry.
Explains senior counsel for Balbir Singh, K.S. Bindra: "When we filed the petition before the Supreme Court, the point which we raised was thatBalbir Singh had been dismissed from service without a departmental inquiry being conducted. Under Article 311(2)(c) of the Constitution, no government servant can be dismissed from service or demoted without an inquiry being carried out. Only the President, if he is satisfied that an inquiry would be against the security of the state, can grant permission to dispense with it. The special investigating team probing the assassination obtained this permission. But the Supreme Court, in the Kaul judgement, had held that the satisfation of the President is justiciable. In other words, the court reserved the power of judicial review. And the fact that the apex court's directions to CAT were that it should reach its decision taking into consideration the Kaul judgement has been ignored by most."
The more human, and ironic, consequence of the reinstatement order hasbeen that the upper echelons of the Delhi Police have been thrown into a tizzy. Some of them have been wringing their hands since December 14. Their problem is simple: how can they reinstate a man whose entire argument has been that the police was "motivated", that it had decided hewas guilty "before any investigation", and that it had"fudged records" concerning his arrest and subsequent incarceration at the Red Fort barracks? And, senior officials are in private talking of the effect such a move may have on the morale of the force and the friction it might create.
While the official reaction of the police is that any decision on whether to appeal against the CAT order can be taken only after a copy of the judgement has been studied by its legal cell, senior officers are only too willing to admit that the possibility of appealing to the Supreme Court against the order has been discussed. But there are other suggestions being aired unofficially. "The only way out of this no-win situation for us is to put Balbir on a human rights job," says an offi-cial. "It will be a coup for us."
But perhaps the most distressing impact of this decision has been that Balbir's lawyers have started feuding in public. R.M. Tiwari, standing counsel for Balbir Singh, feels that in spite of "working for Balbir from the time the death sentence was upheld by the Delhi High Court" he is being "sidelined" by Bindra. "I am thinking of disassociating myself from the case," he sighs. Bindra, on the other hand, feelsthat his juniors are "over-enthusiastic".
In fact, Tiwari told Outlook that he was thinking of withdrawing a petition he had filed on Balbir's behalf against "malicious prosecution". "We have asked for damages worth Rs 52 lakh for the suffering Balbir and his family had to undergo due to this prosecution," he added. That petition is pending before the Delhi High Court.
Balbir, however, does not seem to be too concerned. "They are both my sym-pathisers. There is no clash of interests. They just have different ways of putting their point across," he says. "My batch-mates (1967) are all ACPs now. And I am looking forward to getting back to work. I don't feel there will be any problem on that score, as I can adjust to all situations." But one question remains. Will he be able to adjust to the spotlight that will inevitably be focused on him?
Tags