C B I DIRECTOR TRAMPLED – By Shantonu Sen

Ranjit Sinha Director C B I  has to fall back on the Great Bard today. His words to their Lordships of the Supreme Court  could be Iago’s in Othello

“Good name in man and woman, dear my lord,

Is the immediate jewel of their souls.

Who steals my purse steals trash; ’tis something, nothing;

‘Twas mine, ’tis his, and has been slave to thousands;

But he that filches from me my good name

Robs me of that which not enriches him,

And makes me poor indeed.”

The pity of it is that he has not been indicted. He has not been proved guilty of misconduct or moral turpitude. There has been no trial, no witnesses testifying, no document proved , no forensic expert cited . Yet, he has been, for all practical purposes, convicted of corrupt practices. Yes, he has been spared servitude, confinement  solitary or otherwise but his retirement will be no resting on laurels which he, like  all those who retire from distinguished positions, felt he   deserved, at the very least.

Only a foolish person will suggest that the charge that he was meeting persons accused of grevious corruption  was not grave. The serious nature of these allegations “ Scuttle the C B I probe” were compounded multifold when these meetings are seen to be at his residence, at hours which are not office hours and they have taken place many times. With some accused persons or their touts they are reported to have taken place over forty times in a period of less than one year. With this material, surely, it was the responsibility of some one , be it be the Supreme Court or the Government or some non official agency to ensure that the Director C B I Ranjit Sinha was proved  guilty of corrupt practices. It stands to reason that when such meeting take place in a closed room in twilight or darkness the purpose is not edifying. Did any course of action suggesting illegal favour come to light? Observations , notes  recorded on the file of the case by the Director C B I I are acts in discharge of the high off ice he holds and not a corrupt practice.  What illegal gain take place suggesting personal act of corruption  is not in public knowledge  . If it did,  recusal is not the just order by a court of law . Criminal prosecution under the Prevention of Corruption Act  is the only course open.

On the other hand , the submissions on behalf of Ranjit Sinha suggest that   the material either wholly or partly  submitted to the Supreme Court by Prashant Bhusan and his team to damn Ranjit Sinha is fake. But they   too have also not been followed up , at least its not in public knowledge.  Perjury charges were levied against Prashant Bhusan . What came of it?  It was necessary to rebut it and expose those who , allegedly, trumped up the charges against Ranjit Sinha if he were to   wash  of all the muck thrown at him.

The only conclusion is on very grave charges Ranjit Sinha has been robbed of his reputation when ,if the charges were proved against him ,he should be in Jail. Those who made the charges were not put  on test to prove their charges.  The Supreme Court has not conducted or caused to conduct a criminal trial. It shied away from undertaking an onerous responsibility . The Indian Evidence Act , the Criminal Procedure Code were not called into play  when the Court ordered Ranjit Sinha  to recues himself from all 2G Cases.   Its then a  Kangaroo Court that has trampled on Ranjit Sinha reducing him to dust. It has sentenced him to a life time of infamy against which no appeal lies.