IT was a judgement without precedent, as Kalpnath Rai became the first-ever former cabinet minister to be convicted in the history of independent India. But on March 17, the former Union minister—known for his hyper-impulses and loud reactions—stood unruffled in the courtroom when the additional sessions judge, Shiv Narayan Dhingra, sentenced him to 10 years rigorous imprisonment under the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act (TADA) and a penalty of Rs 10 lakh for harbouring two hitmen of underworld don Dawood Ibrahim.
Along with Rai, four members of the Dawood gang—Subhash Thakur, Bhai Thakur, Shyam Kishor Garikapatti and Mohammad Ahmad Mansoor—have also been sentenced to 10 years imprisonment. Also charged by the CBI were the high-profile manager of the controversial East West Airlines Sabu V. Chacko, and Kalpnath's secretary S.P. Rai.
Dhingra, in his judgement, made some strong observations against Kalpnath Rai noting that the "gravity of his crime is more than that of other ordinary criminals". The sentence observes that the "encouragement of criminals and terrorists and giving them shelter by a minister" encourages and nourishes corruption in the entire ministry.
But Rai is determined not to take his conviction lying down, and will fight to the bitter end in the Supreme Court. A battery of lawyers is working overtime to challenge the judgement in the Supreme Court. And are more than confident of victory.
From the outset, Kalpnath Rai had been reiterating that he had no faith in Dhingra's court. The former minister had also moved an application requesting the transfer of his case to some other court. "With due respect to the Honorable judge, I must say that he did not even consider the defence arguments. There is no mention of our side of the story in the judgement," said Rai's lawyer H.R. Suhail Khan.
The defence lawyers say that the main charge against Rai—that he harboured two members of a terrorist gang—is no offence under TADA. The lawyers say there is a significant difference between a terrorist and a member of a terrorist gang. And till date neither of the two gang members have been declared terrorists by a competent court. This is the ground on which the judgement is going to be challenged.
Subhash Thakur, when arrested in Delhi in July 1993, had revealed during interrogation that the then minister of state for power Kalpnath Rai, through his APS S.P. Rai, had arranged accommodation at the National Power Transmission guest house for him and V.N. Rai between June '92 to October '92. Both of them are accused in the Mumbai JJ hospital shootout case which took place on September 12, 1992. However, according to defence lawyers, unless the trial of the JJ hospital shootout gets over and the court holds Subhash Thakur and V.N. Rai guilty, they cannot be called terrorists. Hence, concealing or harbouring them does not become an offence.
Curiously enough, Kalpnath Rai, who represents Ghosi (UP) in the Lok Sabha, blamed his ordeal on former prime minister P.V. Nara-EXPRESS simha Rao—himself an accused in several cases of bribery, cheating and criminal conspiracy. "I have done nothing wrong. This is a result of my fight with Narasimha Rao," Rai told mediapersons immediately after the judgement.
The judgement, however, is being viewed in legal circles as too harsh for the offence committed. Not only are lawyers critical, the media has also expressed its reservations. It is being pointed out that former BJP MP Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh—who was also arrested under similar charges of harbouring terrorists—was acquitted for "want of evidence". His acquittal by the same court has raised eyebrows in legal circles, particularly in view of the fact that Singh had admitted before the court to having a criminal background.
Another fact which came to light during the investigation was that Subhash Thakur and the other gang members had also gone to former prime minister Chandra Shekh-ar's Bhondsi ashram to seek his help. When Chandra Shekhar was quizzed by the CBI sleuths, he even admitted that the gangsters had come but they were asked to leave. While critics of the judgement abound, Justice Dhingra's pronouncement is nevertheless historic as it proves yet again that not even political leaders and cabinet ministers are above the law.
