8/2/2019 Indias Very Supreme Court

1/2

8/2/2019 Indias Very Supreme Court

2/2

That would be counter-productive because every public functionary could then be driven

to merely passing time and not taking any decisions which could even remotely be

interpreted as being driven by corrupt motives.

The provision for obtaining permission to prosecute a public functionary is there in the

statute books for good and valid reasons. Almost every issue coming up for decision inthe public space lends itself to being decided in more ways than one and any course of

action adopted by the authorities could make them vulnerable to being prosecuted at the

drop of a hat by the affected parties or by the hyper-active NGOs. Saying that such

permissions must be granted within four months or be deemed to have been granted

thereafter makes a mockery of the provision of the law itself. It would have been more in

order if the Supreme Court had ordered the deletion of the provision itself in the Indian

Penal Code and wherever else it exists.

The second judgment on the same subject of spectrum allocation cancelled all the 122

licenses granted by the then Telecom Minister, A. Raja. These licenses were given in

2008 and most companies have made substantial investments in the businesses developedpursuant to these licenses. Canceling them at this stage, rendering them ab intio void,

raises serious questions about the value of government of Indias executive orders.

Of course, those of the licenses which are proved to have been obtained through fraud or

collusion, have no sanctity and can be cancelled by the courts any time. But canceling all

of them in one stroke because they were granted on first-cum-first-served basis instead of

being auctioned to the highest bidders raises serious questions about the sanctity of

Indias sovereign actions. Did the Supreme Court come to the conclusion that each of

these 122 licenses was obtained through misrepresentation, fraud or collusion?

It is doubtful if it is even open to the Supreme Court to exercise that kind of primary

jurisdiction in matters like this. It is always best to leave such things to the courts below

so that the aggrieved parties can approach the High Courts and the Supreme Court in

appeal. With the Supreme Court itself having passed these orders, neither the government

nor the licensees have any idea on whom to turn to. If the honest licensees, howsoever

few they may be, were to claim compensation from the government of India whom would

they turn to?