Supreme Court takes stern view on corruption

NEW DELHI: What sentence will the CBI judge award on October 3 as just and adequate punishment to former Lalu Prasad in an embezzlement case of over Rs 37 crore going back more than 17 years?

While it’s up to the judge to weigh Lalu’s involvement as a public servant, SC since the mid-1980 s has taken a stern view of corruption’s impact on the economy and governance, prescribing a “no leniency” approach towards corrupt public servants. The charges under which Lalu’s convicted can mean a maximum of seven years.

In the case of CBI vs Edwin Devasahayam [2007 (8) SCC 333], the court upheld one-year imprisonment and Rs 100 fine for a Southern Railways assistant commercial manager for demanding a Rs 300 bribe from a TTE to get him a favourable posting.

In a 2005 judgment [Vasant Tukaram Pawar 2005 (3) SCR 630], it narrated a Maharashtra trial court judgment which sentenced a public servant to seven years and a fine of Rs 1 lakh for misappropriating Rs 4.12 lakh.

SC’s stand flows from its view in the K C Sareen vs CBI, Chandigarh [2001 (6) SCC 584] case that “corruption by public servants has reached a monstrous dimension”. Strong legislative, executive and judicial intervention is needed to prevent corrupt public servants from making democracy dysfunctional.

SC drew inspiration from RP Act that says a person stands disqualified to fight polls even if fined after conviction under Prevention of Corruption Act.