A multifaceted personality
By L. H. Naqvi
THE best tribute to Parmeshwar Narain Haksar would be to call him a complete Indian. In spite of having studied at the London School of Economics and being called to the Bar from Lincoln’s Inn he never gave up seeing the country through Indian eyes.

Taking up cudgels for right cause
by Harihar Swarup
THE Press Council of India has after many years a Chairman in Justice P.B. Sawant who asserts the powers vested in him and this self-regulatory body to bring the press on the right course.

Judicial reforms and activism
by Joginder Singh
THE judiciary is an important umpire in the functioning of the executive and the legislature. At the apex is the Supreme Court created by Article 124 of the Constitution. The Supreme Court has the original jurisdiction in disputes between the Central Government and any State Government.

75 Years Ago

Railway strikes and gratuity
SANTINIKETAN: The following communication has been received by Mr C.F. Andrews from the Secretary of the Labour Party, House of Commons, with reference to a question put in the House of Commons regarding the Indian Railway Employees and their gratuities

A multifaceted personality

THE best tribute to Parmeshwar Narain Haksar would be to call him a complete Indian. In spite of having studied at the London School of Economics and being called to the Bar from Lincoln’s Inn he never gave up seeing the country through Indian eyes. In fact the exposure to the outside world, as a student and a diplomat, helped him understand the source of strength of the country.

The home-grown votaries of the doctrine of “swadeshi” may not agree with Haksar’s view that tragedies in human history have been the result of mindsets, dogmatic beliefs and disinclination to analyse and face harsh realities. He believed in the rational evolution of the Indian nation. He insisted that in a country of glorious diversities one must not seek to overwhelm these diversities through rigid political and cultural uniformity.

In his book “A Basket of Fallen Leaves” he said that “in the structuring of modern India what is required is not passive acceptance of social and cultural diversities of Indian life” but respect for them as essential parts of a richly embroidered piece of fabric offering an enormous field for human creativity.

About a decade ago Haksar withdrew from active public life because of failing vision but without snapping contact with the evolving reality. As an internationalist he was troubled by the stagnation of growth and development in India, the dehumanising concentration of wealth in limited hands. The remedy he had to offer was based on the evolution of a “law-governing state” and “law-abiding citizens”.

The world would remember Haksar as a seasoned diplomat, an able administrator, a champion of secular values and a thinker-philosopher. He was one of the architects of India’s socialist experiment. At a seemingly more mundane level he was responsible for the setting up of Super Bazars for those with limited incomes.

But how many of us are familiar with Haksar the photographer? In a way, his failing vision was a primary reason behind his decision to share his secret passion of photography with others. (It began with a Rs 2 box camera he bought with his pocket money when he was 14.) “That is when I decided I must show my work. I thought why not face criticism while I am still around”. But the exhibition of his black and white prints — “colour does not bring out the character” — arranged at Delhi’s AIFACS only increased his circle of admirers.

— L. H. Naqvi

Judicial reforms and activism
by Joginder Singh

THE judiciary is an important umpire in the functioning of the executive and the legislature. At the apex is the Supreme Court created by Article 124 of the Constitution. The Supreme Court has the original jurisdiction in disputes between the Central Government and any State Government. The law as interpreted by the Supreme Court shall be binding on all courts in India. All civil and judicial authorities shall act in the aid of the Supreme Court. Both the Supreme Court and the High Courts have been declared as courts of record and they have the power to punish for contempt.

As per the laws interpreted and followed, the final say in the appointment of Judges of the High Court and Supreme Court vests with the judiciary itself. It is in line with the desire of the Constituent Assembly to secure an independent judiciary. No judge can be removed from his office, except by impeachment. Fortunately, the concept of committed judiciary has died a natural death. It is supremely important to redress the citizen’s grievances through a process of speedy and prompt justice. No amount of activity by the executive can improve the situation, unless those guilty of violating laws are brought to book quickly. Nearly 60 lakh crimes under the Indian Penal Code are reported every year. Crime goes up every year by 3 per cent to 4 per cent. All-India disposal of the Indian Penal Code cases by the police is 79 to 80 per cent and all-India charge-sheeting of the cases for 1995 worked out to be 74.3 per cent. As per Crime India publication, the all-India percentage of disposal of the cases worked out to be 18.3 for the year 1995. In the case of Maharashtra, West Bengal, Arunachal and Manipur, the court disposal is less than 10 per cent.

A disturbing feature is the number of crime against women, which has been rising every year. The gender bias places women all over the world in a disadvantageous position. Women have been subjected to physical and psychological violence. Crime against women can be considered to include the following offences — rape, kidnapping and abduction, dowry-related deaths or torture, both mental and physical, sexual harassment, prostitution, social evils like sati or indecent representation of women. Despite all the publicity that the rape or dowry death or harassment cases get, the time taken for their disposal is the same as any other IPC case. In 1995, there were 13,754 rape cases reported all over the country.

Torture and molestation stood at 59,602 cases, followed by dowry deaths and sexual harassment, numbering 9,848 all over the country. There were 28,579 cases of cruelty by the husband or relatives against women. Other serious cases for 1995 were 37,464 murders, followed by 29,571 attempts to murder. Besides, 2,94,306 theft and 1,16,507 burglary cases were registered in the country, as against 96,520 riots and 2,03,812 cases of injury/grievous injury. Cheating accounted for 30,678 cases. A total of 1,08,99,327 persons were facing trial in the Indian Penal Code cases, including those from the previous years. At the end of the year, trial still remained pending in respect of 89,66,124 persons, that is to say, 82.3 per cent of the accused persons.

Under special and local laws 78,78,737 persons faced trial in 1995, including those from the previous years. At the end of the year, in respect of 36,85,729 persons, the trial still remained pending. Thus, it may be seen that at the end of 1995, cases involving 1,26,51,853 persons — almost equal to the population of Australia — had still to be decided. This figure does not include the traffic offenders or others charged by other enforcement agencies like Customs, Excise, Income Tax, municipalities, electricity boards, forest authorities, sales tax violators, rent control cases or vacation of houses of the owners, or those charged with petty offences under the Police Act or other local laws for curbing public nuisances.

It can be safely estimated that the violators for the aforesaid laws would not be numbering less than the persons involved in the Indian Penal Code cases. The figures of the persons facing prosecution are staggering. As matters stand at present, there does not seem to be any likelihood of improvement in the scenario. In other words, whatever may be the urgency, the legal process cannot move at a faster rate.

There has been no dearth of good advice. What we have been lacking is in implementation. A few improvements can be brought about by the judiciary on its own and some will need change in law. It is time that something was done quickly so that a common man may hope to get justice in his lifetime and quickly. — CNF

Joginder Singh, IPS (retd) is a former Director of the CBI.

Taking up cudgels for right cause
by Harihar Swarup

THE Press Council of India has after many years a Chairman in Justice P.B. Sawant who asserts the powers vested in him and this self-regulatory body to bring the press on the right course if it goes astray. Unlike many of his predecessors, who scrupulously avoided controversies, he does not mind taking up cudgels if the cause is right. Unfortunately, “the toothless body” he heads can only exercise moral authority to fight the powerful and ruthless newspaper barons who have, barring a very few, usurped the freedom of journalists and pose as self-appointed guardians of the free press. Freedom of the press, as enshrined in the Constitution, has been blatantly misused for promotion of their business or political interests. Justice Sawant has shown courage of conviction to bring to the fore the abuse of the freedom of the press by newspaper owners. The examples cited by him includes suppression of news which is inconvenient to press barons. “Many times the news is distorted; it is also planted. The independence of journalists is every day encroached upon by private owners”, he says.

Who is to safeguard the freedom of the Fourth Estate said to be one of the pillars of democracy? Certainly not those who unabashedly misuse the privilege not meant for them. In this backdrop the suggestion of the current President of the Indian Newspaper Society, Mammen Mathew that “the monitoring of the press is best left to those who are in the business of running newspapers”, to say the least, is absurd.

Justice Sawant expects the journalist fraternity as a whole to fall behind him. Unfortunately, this is not happening and the journalists’ organisations have so far failed to come out with adequate response to Justice Sawant’s crusade; perhaps, they are more bothered about their pay packets than professional pride; perhaps, they are too much under the influence of proprietors.

To quote the editor of a leading daily of Calcutta who enjoys more editorial freedom than his counterparts in other equally powerful newspapers: “No journalist can deny that most proprietors now treat editorial staff with extraordinary contempt. Editors are hired and fired at will. Ad managers rule the roost and rare is the publication with any commitment to journalistic integrity. So why are journalists unmoved by Justice Sawant’s efforts to stand up for their rights?”

Clarity of thinking and honest and upright approach to issues have been a trait of Justice Sawant’s personality as a Supreme Court Judge as well as the Chairman of the Press Council. His views on the freedom of press are very clear. In a brief talk with this writer he asserted that “freedom of the press is not meant for owners” and sought to impress on newspapers that the Press Council as an institution was meant for promotion of the freedom of the newspapers, news agencies and, top of all, journalists.

The tendency of certain newspapers including the leading ones, not to publish the verdict of the council is a matter of concern to those who want the press as a whole to accept the moral authority of the Press Council of India. Conventionally, the newspapers are bound to publish the observations of the council without alteration, more so in case of newspapers which have been censured. Publication of the Press Council of India’s verdict would enhance the credibility of erring newspapers, said Justice Sawant. “Acknowledgement of a mistake, in fact, raises the moral stature of a person or an institution”.

What action can the Press Council of India take if erring newspapers defy the council and refuse to comply with its directives?

The Press Council can do nothing except to invoke its moral authority. Justice Sawant agreed that in such a situation, the council had no remedy. Newspapers have lately defied the council. After heading the council for almost four years and now having a second term, Justice Sawant feels that the Press Council of India should be given some teeth to enforce compliance of its directives. His suggestion is that a fine should be imposed on the non-cooperative newspapers which should go up with each day of non-compliance. Such a step can be challenged in a court of law. What step will the council take in such an eventuality?

Justice Sawant is confident of tackling such a situation by invoking the moral authority of the council to advice the courts, particularly higher echelon of judiciary — the High Courts and the Supreme Court — to observe restraint.

Sixtyeight year old Justice Sawant had a stint of 22 years in Bombay High Court and the Supreme Court. He will go down in judicial history having delivered the landmark judgement in the S.R. Bommai versus Union of India case and on the Mandal Commission’s recommendation on the reservation issue.

Asked what difference he felt between his position as a Supreme Court Judge and the Press Council’s Chairman, Justice Sawant said “ In the Press Council of India one is vulnerable while in the apex court one is insulated from attack. Some sort of protection needs to be given to the Press Council”.

75 YEARS AGO

Railway strikes and gratuity

SANTINIKETAN: The following communication has been received by Mr C.F. Andrews from the Secretary of the Labour Party, House of Commons, with reference to a question put in the House of Commons regarding the Indian Railway Employees and their gratuities:-

Further answer has just been received from the India Office a copy of which is enclosed. The copy reads as follows:-

India Office, London: You will remember asking me in July last a question concerning the possibility of granting retrospective effect to the amendment of Gratuity Rules for the subordinate Railway Employees on Indian State Railways, in reply to which I said that the Secretary of State would consult the Government of India. We have now had report from the Government of India upon the matter, but after very careful consideration of the suggestion they find themselves unable to recommend that the order in question should have effect prior to July 1922, and the Secretary of State, after consideration of arguments put forward by the Government, has concurred in the view held by them.

Yours truly,
Winterton