FIR against MP from Kerela - no case made out against Arundhati Roy
SURESH GODBOLE
(Querist) 16 February 2011
This query is : Resolved
Dear All ,
I am pained and angiushed to know that FIR has been lodged against an MP from Kerela while he said he was in the know of a Judge being Bribed .
Mr Moily Lambasted the MP saying with such allegations people will loose faith in the Judiciary
Is it not strange :-
(i) One side Our Democracy boasts of declaring , NO ONE IS ABOVE CONSTITUTION. LAW is Supereme .
(ii) SUPPOSE WHAT IF THE MP IS SAYING IS TRUTH . THEN WHAT ? SHOULD NOT THE TRUTH PREVAIL.
(iii) Should he not be called to register a statement before a Magistrate , and if does not do so , proceed with an FIR against him.
TRANSPERENCY IS THE HALLMARK OF DEMOCRACY.
What should the MP do now .
Has the Police called him further for questioning. If NOT , then WHY NOT?
Suppose he was telling a lie , if the Judge does not act against him for maligning his Name then what will happen to FIR.
If the Police has registed a FIR suo muto then on what grounds (is it of maligning a Pillar of Democracy).
There is no case made out in the eyes of Police if Arundhati Roy says J&K was never ( in hearts of the people) a Part of India. This is not considered Anti National.
Suppose tommorrow I go to America and drive my Car on Left Hand Drive and argue that as I am an Indian I must drive left hand and may be pardoned. The same case if an american comes here and drives Right Hand then what.
There are certain Norms , Laws which are made to be followed. You will be booked IF YOU DRIVE RIGHT HAND SIDE IN INDIA AND BOOKED IN US IF DRIVE LEFT HAND IN US.
Different Norms for Different people. Former Chief Justice says do not make my IT returns public under RTI . Can any person on street say it.
It is heartening to note that our Media is doing a remarkable job to unearth Scams.
I require Expert Opinion to enlighten me as being a Layman and am not able to follow.
With regards , Suresh Godbole, 0-9929596546
Guest
(Expert) 16 February 2011
Indian constitution is based on the equality. But equality means equal among the equals. So that a scavenger cannot claim the previleges of a president. The MP has given a bald statement and based upon the FIR has been lodged. Moreover for the freedom of speach and expression(Art 21)) there are reasonable restrictions are there. One cannot through false allegations on the judiciary. some one may. As the guardian of the constitution the judiciary has also enjoying some previleges. That cannot be curtailed by a layman. every criticism is also subject to reasonable restriction. see your questions it may be come under this purview.
