Justice delayed is Justice Denied Ref :- Lalu Prasad fodder scam conspiracy case in Supreme Court Lalu Prasad is prime accuse in fodder scam in which trial has been completed in 45 out of 52 cases in jharkhand . out of remaining 7 cases Lalu Prasad is accuse in 5 cases. Till now above 950 persons including 2 former ministers, one ex MLA and ex mp have been convicted with 5 to 10 years and fine of Rs.10 lakhs. Lalu Prasad is deliberately delaying the completion of trial in the cases against him by various means including approaching superior courts with truffling complains, not making appearance of his witnesses, making his advocates absent time and again. Now when arguments has been completed on behalf of other 44 accused persons and also of himself mr Lalu Prasad is trying that the CBI special judge be removed and prohibited from delivering the judgement for which he has already announced the date in case no. RC 20 A. When the special CBI court judge announced that he would pronounce judgement on 15 July 2013 Lalu Prasad approached Jharkhand High court to transfer this case from the court of the judge on the plea that the judge is a close relative of Mr. P K Shahi, a cabinet minister in Nitish Kumar Govt., who was defeated by the candidate of his party in the parliament bye election a few months back. Hence the judge will be influenced by Mr. Shahi to defeat him in the court and hence pass judgement against him in this case. Hon'ble Jharkhand High Court refused to buy this argument and dismissed Lalu's petition. Soon Lalu Prasad moved to Supreme Court in the 2nd week of July 2013. The case was mentioned in the court of Hon'ble sathshivam on July 9 who was by that time not elevated as CJ. The court at very mention stage stayed the pronouncement of the CBI special court judge at Ranchi that the judgement will be delivered on July 15. Hon'ble court directed to put up the matter on July 23 next. On July 23, 2013 the court directed that the matter be put up on Aug 6 and in between CBI Would suggest alternative name of the judge who would hear the case no. RC 20 A/1996 in which Lalu Prasad is one of the accused. It means that Supreme Court has already indicated its mind that the concerned case would be transferred to another Court from the court of the present judge who is hearing the case at CBI special court at Ranchi for last two years and cross examination of the witnesses as well as arguments of both sides were completed and a date to deliver the judgement was already announced. LIKELY IMPACT OF THE SUPREME COURT ORDER 1. The same CBI special judge is hearing one more case no. RC 68/96 Related to fodder scam in which also Lalu Prasad is accused. That case too would get transferred to some other judge putting additional burden on him resulting into delay in judgement of other cases with him. 2. The case no. RC 20 A /96 is the mother of remaining 4 cases against Lalu Prasad in fodder scam. It may be noted that Lalu Prasad earlier moved to Supreme Court to get all the cases against him in the fodder scam as one case because the charges and witnesses in all the cases are of same nature and unnecessarily mostly common witnesses will have to be appear 5 times before the court during each process of the hearing such as at the time of giving witness, at the time of cross examination etc. Thus unnecessarily time of the court as well as expenditure from state exchequer would be spoiled. The apex court did not subscribe his arguments but passed order that details and facts given by someone orally or in writing as well as the documents certified in any one caseduring trial process may/ will be used in all cases. Hence the transfer of one case from a court of a judge will have impact on the remaining 4 cases as far as Lalu Prasad as an accused is concerned. 3. There are other 44 accused in RC-20/96 . None of them has any grudge with the judge. Now if the case is transferred from him argument will again begin and those accused will have to bear additional expenditure for the argument for which they have already spend in the form of fee and other expenses. 4. In case the case is transferred to another court The fresh argument process will take more than a year time and the process in between may be deliberately prolonged on one pretext or other leading the trial to unending delay. It is worth mentioning that in this case Lalu Prasad has already moved four times to the Jharkhand high court raising unwarranted flimsy points. His advocates too tried their best to delay the case at various stages on one pretext or other. 5.The case transfer from the judge will defeat the core objects of recent high court and Supreme Court judgments which are aimed at cleansing the legislatures and the parliament from tainted persons and criminals. The charge sheet filed by CBI in this case provides enough evidences which clearly indicate that scam would not have taken place had Lalu Prasad not conspired and actively collaborated with the scamsters. Charges against Lalu in this case will be sent separately? 6. This is the case based on the very first charge sheet filed by CBI in 1997. Trial in Several other cases have been completed and almost all accused barring a few have been convicted with more than 5 yrs imprisonment and a fine upto Rs.10 lakhs. The convicts includes a number of MLAs, MPs and Ministers in Lalu's cabinet with very very less charges compared to the gravity, seriousness and number of charges against Lalu in this case. 7. Lalu Ji knows it well that no judge will spare him from punishment and he will not get less that 5 year imprisonment. This will keep him of the electoral politics for a long time. Hence is using variously types of diatribes so that trial of any of his cases does not complete in near future. 8. Cases against Lalu Prasad in fodder shame are - 1. RC - 20 /96 regarding excess withdrawal from chaibasa treasury. 2. RC - 38 / 96 regarding excess withdrawal from Dumka treasury . 3. RC - 47 / 96 regarding excess withdraw from Doranda treasury, Ranchi 4. RC - 63 / 96 regarding excess withdrawal from Deoghar treasury. 5. RC - 68 / 96 regarding excess withdrawal from Chaibasa treasury. 9. If the Supreme Court decides to transferred the case to some other case it will be used as precedence and open a pandora box for such requests in future in High Courts and subordinate courts all over the country and will also open a floodgate for interference in trial by superior courts in future. 10. The high court opined at the concluding part of its judgment directing the CBI enquiry in fodder scam on 11.3.1996 that " they (directions) are intended merely to serve the public interest and keep the people's faith in the system intact . For, if that faith is shaken, the whole edifice will fall. The values of public life are fast declining. I do not expect that this judgement and CBI investigation will improve the system. But if we are only able to maintain it, by our effort, we will feel gratified." These remarks are still relevant. 11.The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal against the Patna high court order filed by the Bihar govt. on 19.03.1996 and lastly conclude that " we are also of the opinion that, to alleviate the apprehension of the state ( read lalu prasad as the then shall, apart from the CM ) about the control of investigation by the CBI, it should be under over all control and supervision of the Chief Justice of Patna High Court . The CBI officers entrusted with the investigation shall, apart from the criminal courts concerned, inform the Chief Justice of the Patna High Court from time to time of the progress made in the investigation and may, if they need any direction in the matter of conducting the investigation, obtain them from him. The apex court in its judgement further directed that " That the learned chief justice of Patna high court may either post the matter for direction s before a bench presided over by him or constitutebany other appropriate bench. After investigation is over and reports are finalised, as indicated by the division bench of the High court in the impugned judgement , expeditious follow up action shall be taken. The high court and the state govt. shall co-operate in assigning adequate number of special judges to deal with the cases expeditiously so that no evidence may be lost. 12. Will not any interference from any level in this case such as to prohibit the CBI special court from delivering the judgement after prolonged hearing of the case will go against the spirit and objectives of the judgements 17 years ago ? The investigation of this case was under constant monitoring of a division bench of Patna high court and charge sheets were finalised under its guidance and the judges of the special courts were too appointed by the high court after due feed backs from competent central and state agencies. Then what is the need of casting aspersions over the intention and integrity of the special court judge after the stage of delivering of the judgement after a prolonged hearing of the case.