Off Court
Mindset of the state investigators and also the restricted interpretation of various laws meant for handling different offences are some of the reasons for sifting right and wrong in a particular scenario. That's indeed the issue worth a discussion in view of a variety of media operations such as `Duryodhyan', 'jobs for cash', 'warrants for cash', 'a role in films for sex' and so on.
Having a strong preference for any of these favours is not illegal. No one is a thief unless caught, that's the law. Otherwise, as Former Chief Justice of India M N Venkatachaliah would so often scoff, "for police every one is a criminal in their eye unless proved otherwise." Thus, we all are suspect except the cops!
A person who has been trapped on camera with indelible evidence of his/her vulnerability to financial or sexual favours, knows he would suffer public humiliation and may be even a criminal case but he would still not dare go to a police station to lodge a complaint that he or she had been either coerced, enticed, blackmailed or in general entrapped into committing an offence.
Such a complainant should be ready to "satisfactorily" answer a horde of queries to be asked by a number of investigators on his own antecedents, his assets, his income, his relationship with wife or husband, how he won the election or got a particular post and so on and so forth. Every query answered could hit the headlines the next morning. After all, he or a she is not an ordinary person but a public figure and hence, it would be argued, people have a right to know.
Every judgment clarifying certain laws and their use in different situations come in cases having bad facts. Take the case of death sentence. The issue would not be raised unless there is a case of murder or murders of extreme diabolic nature and termed as rarest of rare, shaking the conscious of the entire society and judges. The facts must be bad to discuss whether death sentence should be permissible or not. Or what should be the mode of execution.
Or, whether a lawmaker can take a bribe for exercising his exclusive powers as an MP or MLA in the House. It has surprised everyone that there is a constitutional protection for a bribed lawmaker but a bribe-giver could be punished. Seen from the law point, a bribe-giver would be tried for an offence which is not an offence at all, bribe taking by the lawmakers.
A lawyer recently took a bold step in advising some of the 'Operation Duryodhan' victims not to resign but seriously consider filing a criminal complaint under the Indian Penal Code that action should be taken against those persons who had "entrapped", "impersonated", offered him bribe or gave him bribe with a motive to malign him, all of which are offences under the IPC.
But, the sleuths would ask him many whys. Remember Daler Mehndi who was subjected to most inhuman treatment including being asked to strip, something not all required for the investigation. Daler bitterly wept during a TV programme as he narrated the brutality-committed to him by the police. He later got the clean chit from the Punjab police.
