The constitutional guarantees of fundamental right of freedoms are violated every too often times. Ninety five per cent inmates in detention are inside waiting for hearing of their bail applications. Proportion of criminals serving their sentences is not even five per cent of all inmates. In 2008, the Supreme Court nominated Court had discovered 292 foreign nationals were under illegal detention due to their refusal or inability to meet illegal demands of the authority. Several laws are used for specific purpose of serving greed of officers in uniform. The spineless but greedy men would be serving special needs of those who assign them such posts. Such gross misuse of the seat and authority in rule by law is a pattern in every system of governance. It was not so obvious for first six decades of independence but the misuse is not exception now but daily usual routine. The exception is in rare events.
Arrest, detention and insistence by the Narcotic Control Board to retain the young Aryan Khan in its custody or further investigations though Aryan Khan was not accused to have consumed any kind of prohibited substance or possessing on his person even small amount of any narcotic. But his greater crime was in his being son of popular cine artist- a Muslim by birth though was not practicing religion nor having displayed animus towards any other religion. Second crime of Aryan was his birth from the womb of a female who was born to Hindu parents but married to and living with a Muslim. Third crime was his father had enough resources but also known to be ardent disciple of the Gandhi family. Shah Rukh Khan had often been to visit the Gandhi family though he did not participate in the election process.
I believe the Muslims are enjoined with compulsion to reveal their religion before their nationality. The Muslim from India will identify himself as the Muslim Indian and not as the Indian Muslim. Rule may have been introduced to indicate religion is common though nationality may differ. But the prejudices make the interpretation different that they put their religion before their nationality.
No explanation is put forward or sought for involvement of Gosavi a middle man in the entire case. If he was present on the cruiser at the time of the NCB raid why he was not arrested like Aryan Khan but could escape and remain out of the clutches for twenty days but appeared immediately on scene when accused of dubious role of money making for involved officials in the raid.
Though son was involved in the case and in detention for 22 days, senior Khan did not go public with his reaction of appear as anxious father. His silence indicated his attitude that his son now adult is expected to handle his own affairs. His silence was also to indicate he was neither using his fame, his name or political connections to extricate his son from a tight clutches of the enforcement agency. A twitter route was used to express resentment against an educational institute to use Shah Rukh Khan for propagation. Obviously the man had no words to condemn the minister in the union government though his son was caught for and accused of killing eight farmers by deliberately ramming his vehicle from behind. No party man demanded exclusion of the minister from the ministry though demand was raised to exclude the father from contractual agreement merely because his son was arrested not for possessing banned drug substances but for seeking his information.
Aryan Khan had not said he will not cooperate if he were set free, The Board official was attempting to prove his courage and honesty. He sought to keep young witness in custody without being cowed down by fame, name, fortunes and political connection of a parent of the arrested young man. This becomes a classic case of everyone using the young man to earn reputation as honest being.
And the case also high lights the gross attitude of official enforcement agencies to ignore the individual fundamental rights o9f citizens. The Prime Minister indicated several times and through several actions that he preferred to depend on the official machinery than on a sensitive political apparatus. His style has not succeeded in elimination of corruption from the system but has resulted in taking rates up corrupt deals.
MISRULE
Vijay Sanghvi - 2021-10-26 10:48
The wide difference between the rule of law and the rule by law cannot be bridged. In the rule of law the meaning and interpretation of law remains same in every case but interpretation of each law keeps shifting to suit needs of those in the power seat. For 60 years in the post independence era, though law was not misused but those in the power seat also did not attempt to eliminate the archaic rules like authority to detain any one on suspicions. Even today accusation by men in law enforcement agency converts in public eye the accused as criminal and the arbiters of freedom tend to accept the word of men in authority even in face of absurdity.