Unconstitutional amendment

Sir,

This is in reference to article " Controversial Cr.P.C Amendment Act-Plea Bargaining" dated 12/12/03 by Justice R P Sethi.

I do agree with the view point and farsightedness of Justice R P Sethi. As proposed amendment in G P C being introduced under Amendment Bill 2003, Bill No. LX of 2003, is violative of Article 14 of the constitution of India which allows reasonable fair and just classification. As law cannot treat all men alike by equating or judging poor and rich, mighty and weak alike.

We are going to create an atmosphere of injustice and social disorder or unrest and faith of people in Judiciary will be diminished by this very proposed amendment.

India lacks uniformity in many spheres be it education, or economic status, so we cannot make same law for every body, there is need of reasonable classification which this very amendment is not following.

By introducing this amendment in Cr.P.C., we are going to allow rich, influential and mighty people to do crime openly and after that allowing them to pay compensation in terms of money and get least punishment for their crime only because they are rich, mighty and influential.

So not only Judges, Advocates and Academicians but common man should and must oppose this amendment as Cr.P.C is meant for society (to make it crime free and developed one). Print media also have a vital role to play in this regard.

Yours etc...
Advocate Gaurave Goswami
Prem Nagar, New Plots,
Jammu.

Anti-defection bill

Sir,

It refers to welcome decision of the Union Government to introduce bills to tighten anti-defection law and to limit ministry-size to maximum 15 percent of strength of the lower House. Ministry-size should be restricted to maximum 10-percent of Lower-House strength instead of proposed 15-percent. Even though defections have made mockery of our democracy, yet any tightening of anti-defection law will induce dictatorship of big party bosses. Best remedy is to make provisions whereby legislators may have to vote secretly for election of the leader of the House so that it may become impossible to prize the greedy ones changing sides. To ensure stability of Governments and full terms of lower Houses, no-confidence motion may also be voted secretly on written demand of at least one-third members and with compulsion to name alternate leader in the same motion. Abolition of constitutional provision of Upper House in States can cut useless legislative expenses when only five states are continuing with ‘white elephant’ legacy in form of Vidhaan Parishads!

At the same time, bills for simple basis reforms which do not require any discussion should also be introduced. No person should be allowed to contest from more than one constituency or for both Lok Sabha and Vidhaan Sabha. Rather a sitting MP or MLA must resign from his/ her earlier seat before filing nomination for the other seat.

Any MP or MLA joining Ministry in State or in Centre may automatically lose his/ her earlier membership to avoid unfortunate situations like Vajpayee Government losing by lone controversial vote of the then Orissa Chief Minister Girdhar Gomango in Lok Sabha!

Yours etc...
Subash Chandra Agrawal
1775 Kucha Lattushah
Dariba,
Delhi