Dec 05, 2023
Dec 05, 2023
by V. Sundaram
Just as there are first duties of citizenship, there are also first duties of government. If a citizen’s first duty is to uphold the Law, it is also a first duty of government to enforce the Law –to do so by prosecuting and punishing those who violate our Criminal Law. This is the stern message that the Supreme Court Bench consisting of two Judges The Hon'ble Mr. Justice B.Sudershan Reddy and The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Surinder Singh Nijjar has given to the most corrupt and chaotic Congress UPA II Government of India in its historic Judgement delivered on July 4, 2011.
This Bench of the Supreme Court of India has covered itself with everlasting glory by summarily rejecting the supremely corrupt Sonia Gandhi directed UPA II Union government’s claim of absolute immunity and directed it to disclose the names of those Black Money holders having bank accounts in Liechtenstein, as revealed by Germany, against whom investigations have been concluded, either partially or wholly, and show-cause issued and proceedings initiated.
|“Decency, security, and liberty alike demand that government shall be subjected to the same rules of conduct that are commands to the citizen. ... If the government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy.”
- American Judge
Hon. Justice Louis Brandeis
A Bench consisting of Justice B. Sudershan Reddy and Justice S.S. Nijjar, has however clarified that: “the Union of India is exempted from revealing the names of those individuals who have accounts in banks of Liechtenstein and revealed to it by Germany, with respect of whom investigations / enquiries are still in progress and no information or evidence of wrongdoing is yet available……without establishment of prima facie grounds to accuse them of wrongdoing would be a violation of their rights to privacy. Details of bank accounts can be used by those who want to harass, or otherwise cause damage to individuals.”
The Supreme Court has appointed a High-Level Special Investigation Team (SIT) headed by former apex court judge B P Jeevan Reddy to monitor the investigation and the steps being taken to bring back black money stashed away in foreign banks. Besides Justice B P Reddy, who will be the chairman of the SIT, the apex court also appointed its former judge, Justice M B Shah as the vice-chairman of the panel.
The Supreme Court Bench has directed that the High-Level Committee (HLC) constituted by the Union Government to look into the issue of black money would 'forthwith' be a part of the High-Level Special Investigation Team (SIT) constituted by the Supreme Court of India.
The Supreme Court of India passed the above order on a petition filed by eminent jurist Ram Jethmalani and others seeking directions to the government to track black money stashed away abroad and bring it back. The Apex Court has directed the Union Government to issue an immediate notification forthwith regarding the appointment of the High-Level Special Investigation Team (SIT) and ordered the Union Government Machinery to cooperate with it.
The Supreme Court Bench, while passing the above Order, made some scathing and hard-hitting observations against the Union Government for its "failure" to take proper and effective action against people who have illegally stashed away black money in foreign banks. Observing that the phenomenon of black money is "extremely dangerous to the country", the Supreme Court of India has said the quantum of money in foreign banks is a rough measure of the "weakness" and "softness" of the nation. The SC Bench has declared that it is a serious lapse on the part of the Union Government which will have disastrous implications on the country's external and internal security.
The full text of this Supreme Court Judgement which runs to more than 65 pages can be accessed at the following url http://bharatkalyan97.blogspot.com/2011/07/black-moneysc4th-july.html
Here are a few more ‘Excerpts’ from this great judgement:
"We must express serious reservation on the steps taken by the government... It's clear to us that investigation was completely stalled and expedited only after the court's intervention. "It was only upon this court's insistence that proper investigation was conducted in the Pune stud farm owner Hasan Ali Khan's case.”
"There was much to be desired. We hold that continued involvement of the Court is necessary. We direct the SIT to take over all the cases relating to the issue of black money and file a status report before the Supreme Court. We request the SIT to submit a Comprehensive Action Plan to deal with cases relating to the black money issue.”
“We have perused the agreement with Germany. We are convinced that the said agreement, by itself, does not proscribe the disclosure of the relevant documents and details of the same, including the names of various bank account holders in Liechtenstein. The redundancy, that the Union of India presses, with respect to the last sentence of Article 26(1) of the double taxation agreement with Germany, necessarily transgresses upon the boundaries erected by our Constitution. It cannot be permitted.”
“We have perused the documents in question, and in the task of upholding of fundamental rights, the State cannot be an adversary. The State has the duty, generally, to reveal all the facts and information in its possession to the court, and also provide the same to the petitioners. This is so, because the petitioners would also then be enabled to bring to light facts and the law that may be relevant for the court in rendering its decision.”
“The Special Investigation Team (SIT) constituted pursuant to the orders of this court shall take over the matter of investigation of the individuals whose names have been disclosed by Germany as having accounts in banks in Liechtenstein, and expeditiously conduct the same. The SIT shall review the concluded matters also in this regard to assess whether investigations have been thoroughly and properly conducted or not and on coming to the conclusion that there is a need for further investigation shall proceed further in the matter.”
“The SIT shall also be charged with the responsibility of preparing a comprehensive action plan, including the creation of necessary institutional structures that can enable and strengthen the country's battle against generation of unaccounted monies, and their stashing away in foreign banks or in various forms domestically. The SIT shall be charged with the responsibilities and duties of investigation, initiation of proceedings, and prosecution, whether in the context of appropriate criminal or civil proceedings of all issues relating to the matters concerning and arising from unaccounted monies of Hassan Ali Khan and the Tapurias; all other matters with respect to unaccounted monies being stashed [away] in foreign banks by Indians or other entities operating in India that may arise in the course of such investigations and proceedings.”
The Menace of Kala Dhan
Directing the SIT to file periodic status reports to the Supreme Court, the Bench has said, “The issue of black money has to be taken with a degree of seriousness and the State is primarily responsible to make all efforts to bring back into the country such wealth and punish people who have stashed away money in foreign banks. In a country where most of its people are uneducated and illiterate, suffering from hunger and squalor, the retraction of the monitoring of these matters by this court would be unconscionable.”
“The quantum of such monies may be rough indicators of the weakness of the state, in terms of both crime prevention, and also of tax collection. Depending on the volume of such monies, and the number of incidents through which such monies are generated and secreted away, it may very well reveal the degree of softness of the state.”
“The worries of this court relate not merely to the quantum of monies said to have been secreted away in foreign banks, but also the manner in which they may have been taken away from the country, and with the nature of activities that may have engendered the accumulation of such monies. The worries of this court are also with regard to the nature of activities that such monies may engender, both in terms of the concentration of economic power, and also the fact that such monies may be transferred to groups and individuals who may use them for unlawful activities that are extremely dangerous to the nation, including actions against the state.”
“Unaccounted monies, especially large sums held by nationals and entities with a legal presence in the nation, in banks abroad, especially in tax havens or in jurisdictions with a known history of silence about sources of monies, clearly indicate a compromise of the ability of the state to manage its affairs in consonance with what is required from a constitutional perspective. If the state is soft to a large extent, especially in terms of the unholy nexus between the lawmakers, law keepers, and law-breakers, the moral authority, and also the moral incentives, to exercise suitable control over the economy and society would vanish. Large unaccounted monies are generally an indication of that.”
Justifying its decision to constitute the SIT, the Supreme Court Bench has said that in many previous cases as well the Apex Court had been passing such orders to fulfil its constitutional obligations. The bench said the issue of black money has to be taken with a degree of seriousness and the State is primarily responsible to make all efforts to bring back into the country such wealth and punish people who have stashed away money in foreign banks.
The Supreme Court observed that unaccounted money going to foreign banks from the country is a clear and categorical reflection of the incapacity of its authorities to collect taxes which is their constitutional obligation. The Bench has observed "These incapacities go to the very heart of un-governance and the wealth going to foreign banks might cause substantial damage to the country as it could be used for unlawful activities.”
What thrilled me most is the fact that the totally lawless, unconstitutional and supremely corrupt Sonia Congress UPA II Union Government totally failed in its mischievous attempt to mislead the Supreme Court that the High Level Committee (HLC) already constituted by the Union Government with Revenue Secretary as Chairman and Directors of CBI, Intelligence Bureau, Enforcement Directorate, Chairman of CBDT, Director General of Revenue Intelligence, Director General of Narcotics Control, Director of Foreign Intelligence Office (FIO) and Joint Secretary of Foreign Trade as Members would be more than adequate to deal with Black Money and that there is no pressing need for the Supreme Court of India to intervene in the matter by appointing a High-Level Special Investigation Team (SIT) headed by former apex court Judge B P Jeevan Reddy to monitor the investigation and the steps being taken to bring back black money stashed away in foreign banks. The Supreme Court Bench summarily rejected this pre-planned and pre-conceived criminal request of the Sonia Congress UPA II Government, making it clear that the High Level Committee (HLC) of the Union Government will work under the overall supervision and control of the Special investigation Team (SIT). Thus the criminally corrupt Congress UPA II government failed miserably before the supreme court in its shameless effort to legally reconcile its gross untruths with its net lies!!
The two Supreme Court Judges clearly saw through the grisly game of the Union Government and ordered the immediate appointment of a High-Level Special Investigation Team (SIT) headed by the Former Supreme Court Judge B P Jeevan Reddy. To the total surprise, political distress and official discomfiture of the non-performing union Government wedded to the nefarious cause of Sonia Gandhi corruption day in and day out on a 24x7 basis, the Supreme Court Bench directed that the High Level Committee (HLC) already constituted by the union Government with Revenue Secretary as Chairman will work under the direct control of the Special Investigation Team (SIT) constituted by the Supreme Court.
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice B.Sudershan Reddy and The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Surinder Singh Nijjar have also questioned the dubious and inefficient functioning of the HLC. The Supreme Court Bench has expressed great surprise as to why a charge sheet filed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) against Hasan Ali Khan in a money laundering case was not placed before the HLC which was appointed by the Union Government. The Supreme Court raised this very relevant and unanswerable question when the Solicitor General of the Union Government made the most dishonourable and untenable plea to the Apex Court by arguing that there was no public necessity or justification for the Supreme Court of India to order the constitution of a Special investigation Team (SIT) when the Union Government had already created a High Level Committee (HLC) to deal with the problem of Black Money.
The whole country knows that the HLC is only a Sonia Congress UPA II government’s eye-wash sham exercise to mislead the people of india. It is a joint hogwash of the political de-facto prime minister Sonia Gandhi and her economic and religious political advisor Ahmed Patel of Sukur Narain Bhakia to hide the accumulation of black money by Sonia Gandhi and her family in several accounts abroad. The political credentials of Ahmed Patel are as dubious as that of Haji Mastan or Dawood Ibrahim because it is reliably understood that he was once a bartender to Sukur Narain Bhakia who was the most notorious smuggler in south Gujarat between 1960s and 1990s.
Dealing a deathblow to the roots of Sonia Congress UPA II Government’s political commitment to the generation and safeguarding of unaccounted Black Money in India and abroad, the Supreme Court Bench directed the matter to be listed for further directions immediately after August 15, 2011.
I offer my fervent salutations to The Hon'ble Mr. Justice B.Sudershan Reddy and The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Surinder Singh Nijjar for having passed a historic and path-breaking judgement defending the liberty of the millions of India against the tyrannical onslaught of bloody black money revolution conceived, planned, organized and launched by the Firangi Memsahib Sonia Gandhi and her strictly Private Estate called the UPA II Government of India. Without law, liberty would be non-existent except for a favoured one or a favoured few. Liberty, then, ought to be the chief concern of the Supreme Court of Law as it should to be of a democratic Government.
It has never been phrased better than by Heraclitus of Ephesus twenty-five hundred years ago.
“The major problem of human society is to combine that degree of Liberty without which Law is tyranny with that degree of Law without which Liberty becomes License”.
In short these two exemplary judges have become timeless heroes as Champions of Liberty of the people of India. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes rightly stated when he wrote: “The Law is the witness and external deposit of our moral life. Its history is the history of the moral development of the race”. Through their great Judgement, these two Judges have proclaimed that they are under a duty, within the limits of their power of innovation within the framework of the Constitution, to maintain a relation between Law and Morals, between the precepts of jurisprudence and those of reason and conscience.
In my view, this Judgement of the Supreme Court of India, has given cubic content to the timeless message of Substantive Law delivered by that incomparably great American Judge Hon. Justice Louis Brandeis (1856-1941) in U.S. Supreme Court Olmstead v. U.S., 277 U.S. 438 (1928):
“Decency, security, and liberty alike demand that government shall be subjected to the same rules of conduct that are commands to the citizen. In a government of laws, existence of the government will be imperilled if it fails to observe the law scrupulously. Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy.”
More by : V. Sundaram