'This time the SC has erred'
Disapproving of the ruling in the Sidhu case, surfers call it a political decision.Updated: Jan 24, 2007 14:52 IST
The Supreme Court has generally been hailed as the last resort of the hapless Indian citizen. But the conviction of former cricketer and BJP MP Navjot SinghSidhu in the Patiala road rage case by the apex court has drawn flak from our surfers.
Most wrote back to say that the haste with which the apex court sent him free was uncalled for.How, for instance, would the parliamentary system be set right if an MP regardless of his political orientation was not punished for his crime?
Here's how the feedback went.
Satbir Singh Bedi from New Delhi, India didn't approve of SC ruling.
"In my opinion, a person who in a fit of road rage kills a fellow and has no control over his anger cannot take balanced decisions."
"Such people are not fit to be elected to the highest institution in the country ie Lok Sabha which have to consider various legislative measures including the proclamation of emergency and war with enemies in a cool and balanced manner. It is a pity that we have many MPs like Navjot Sidhu and even more dangerous like Shahabuddin. There are even ministers in the council of ministers like Akhileshwar Prasad Singh and Taslimuddin etc who are known dons."
"Can we expect such MPs and ministers to have a balanced mind to examine the pros and cons of a situation and act in the best interest of the country?" he asked.
Bharat from Chandigarh, India felt this judgment would mean other convicted politicians would look for ways and means to get away.
"Supreme Court has set a bad example by setting aside the conviction of Navjot Sidhu. It would only open floodgates for other convicted politicians to approach the court for relief. I fail to understand the hurry the court was in to help Sidhu. After all, an elderly person had died in a scuffle with him."
Kram from Bangalore, India thought, "Sidhu must be punished, justice is blindfolded; it sees neither the rich nor the poor and is expected to favour none."
Saroj Sharma from New Delhi, India felt this judgment did India no good as those with power would get away with crime.
"The Supreme Court relief to Navjot Sidhu only proves that those who have the means and ways can get away from anything. The laws of the land are only for the common man and not the powerful. The haste of the apex court in allowing people like Sidhu to contest would not help anyone. It is a political decision."
Prof RK Gupta from Jodhpur, India felt this was yet another glaring example of our judicial failure.
"This is the latest and fresh example of our fraudulent judicial system which is a serious waste of time, money and energy."
"Fact remains that some one murdered a man in Patiala. So many years have passed and prosecutors and courts have been playing 'ping pong' with one court convicting, another court acquitting and then reversing again."
Raj, Norwich, England though differed from the rest. He felt that Sidhu's crime was not a pre-meditated act and therefore the judgment was fitting.
"This is good judgment from the apex court. What ever happened in the case of Sidhu was incidental. By no means is he is a criminal. The tragedy is that one can't even file an FIR against a real criminal in India."
All views and opinions presented in this article are solely those of the surfers and do not necessarily represent those of HindustanTimes.com.
First Published: Jan 24, 2007 14:52 IST