One event was the release on parole - later cut short following public outrage -of Manu Sharma who a decade ago had shot dead Jessica Lal, a young girl earning her livelihood working as a bartender in a New Delhi night club after she refused to serve liquor to him as the bar had closed. The second event was the vulgar display of wealth by Punjab's ruling family for celebrating the marriage of one of its politician scions whom Chief Minister Parkash Singh Badal had once described as “one of the most eligible bachelors of Punjab”.

Manu Sharma's parole is a sordid story of how the moneyed and powerful political elite, in connivance with the police and bureaucracy, bend laws to save their offspring first from getting convicted for heinous crimes and then use their influence to seek “extended freedom” for them through parole on the basis of cooked-up pleas. The facts of the Manu Sharma case need a brief mention to highlight some of its facets having national implications but have escaped the public and media's attention.

A decade ago, Manu Sharma, a young scion of a Chandigarh-based rich and influential Congress politician walks into a bar carrying a gun. The girl behind the counter refuses to serve liquor as the bar timings were over. Angered by the girl's 'insolence', the boy pulls out his gun and shoots her dead. The political class went head on to save one of its own members through manipulations. The police contaminates the crime scene and damages the evidence. The forensics men are 'managed'. Bullets are switched and lies are told. When the case comes to court, the boy is acquitted.

The acquittal angers the people and the media takes up the issue. In appeal, the political class's success to manipulate the system is exposed and the High court sentences the murderer to life imprisonment.

Two months back, Manu applied for parole as “he had to perform the last rites of his grandmother; his mother was ill; and, he wanted to look after his business.” The inquiry by the Delhi police found all these 'facts' fallacious. They found that his grand mother had died several months ago, his mother was addressing Press Conferences in Chandigarh and his business was doing fine. But the Chandigarh police, obviously influenced by his politician father and former Minister Venod Sharma who earlier had to quit the ministry in the wake of the controversy involving his son, and without concrete checking of facts had no objection if Manu was granted parole. Sheila Dikshit's Delhi government ignoring its own police's recommendation depended on Chandigarh police's report and granted Manu one month's parole. His parole was later extended for another month. During this period, while partying in a Delhi nightclub he was again allegedly involved in a scuffle which proved to be his undoing. The Delhi High Court demolished Delhi government's claim that it went by the rule book in granting parole to Manu. Justice Kailash Gambhir cited Sharma's example to establish the preferential treatment given to “resourceful” convicts as the latter had been granted parole in barely 20 days while applications from others had been pending for over six months.

Though the public outrage over his parole forced Manu to surrender before the expiry of his extended parole period, the whole incident highlights three facets of the case which have drawn little attention. First is the role of witnesses who backtracked obviously either under pressure or for allurements which led to Manu's acquittal in the lower court. The issue of action against witnesses turning hostile or backtracking from their statements invited the judiciary's attention. There was talk about measures needed to be taken against the recalcitrant witnesses. This talk gained currency after the witnesses, mostly government officers, in Badals disproportionate assets case backtracked from their earlier statements.

The second facet which has completely escaped attention is the action that is needed to be taken against those whose influence makes the witnesses turn hostile. Nobody in his senses can claim that the accused could influence the witnesses from behind the bars. It is the outsiders who 'manage' the witnesses with allurements or threats. Nobody has thought of any action against such outsiders who obviously are influential and moneyed people.

The third facet of the Manu Sharma's parole controversy is the criminal silence of the opposition parties who never miss any opportunity to put the government in the dock even on minor issues. The political class unites when its own interests are involved!

The second incident relates to the ostentatious marriage celebrations of Punjab Deputy Chief Minister Sukhbir Singh Badal's brother-in-law Bikramjit Singh Majithia. Marriages are auspicious occasions which needed to be celebrated with feasts. So there was nothing unusual if such celebrations were held for Majithia's marriage. But the problem arises when such celebrations become a vulgar display of wealth and their organizers unashamedly misuse the official machinery to manage them. In the first of such cerebrations held in Majithia's constituency last week, over 20,000 guests participated in the most lavish and extravagant party the catering job for which was given to a renowned New Delhi-based catering firm. Punjab's newly rich political class controlling the reins of power has outdone even the Maharajas whose extravagant and flashy lifestyles they never tire of criticising. The ruling elite often calls itself servants of the people and upholders of the laws. They sermonise people to follow the Gurus teachings who preached and practised simplicity. But they themselves violate the Gurus teachings. Surprisingly, the Sikh clergy, which otherwise summons even ordinary Sikhs to Akal Takhat even on relatively minor issues or for allegedly violating 'maryada', prefers to keep mum when it comes to those controlling the power and money strings.

It is time for our ruling elite and religious leaders in Punjab and Haryana to shed hypocrisy and in true sense uphold the laws of the land and become social reformists.(IPA Service)