In the present state of affairs, courts appear to be the only place where justice can be expected. But a citizen does expect justice from the officials in the administration though this has become rare over the years. I recall the wise words of Swaran Singh — India’s elder statesman who during the Internal Emergency of June 1975 presided over a committee to consider whether to recommend deletion of Article 226 of the Constitution. He said that when he was a minister in the government of Punjab he found it difficult to render justice in individual cases, and it was best that courts were left to deal with them. That is why he opposed deletion of Article 226 — it is regrettable that it was the lawyer members of the committee who disagreed with him. But it was Swaran Singh who prevailed upon Indira Gandhi not to amend the Constitution and take away the right of citizens to approach the courts by way of writs. The moral of this is that though lawyers are good, sometimes they are also exceptionally good at rationalising tyranny!

One hopes that the ministry in charge of the CBI, or the IBI if established, would inculcate in all its officials the understanding that it is better for the public administration and for the image of the government that directions, commands or hints — to “fix-him” or “drop the case” — are consciously eschewed. This would help remove current public cynicism of departments of government and restore confidence in the expectation of getting justice from the administration. Approaching the courts to intervene is always a slow, tortuous process: and should be an exception. This is how good government will be ultimately achieved.

... contd.