At last, the CBI court has given its verdict. It has acquitted the accused who were alleged to be responsible for demolition of the Masjid. The court has been unequivocal in declaring that there was neither any criminal conspiracy nor any planning by the accused for demolition.
It is easy to fault any judgement; it becomes easier if one has not read any part of the judgement. It seems that ignorance about any judgement gives one the inalienable right to denounce it outright. It has now become the habit of political parties to condemn any inconvenient judgement as repugnant to law. These parties assume they are always on the right side of law and therefore any judicial decision not acceptable to them is prima facie defective.
Sitaram Yechury wonders how the Masjid could self-implode. The verdict clearly says that the demolition was the handiwork of some miscreants who were not the persons who are accused. His trick is to put words in the mouth of the judge and then criticise the judgement for what it does not say. This is not expected of a seasoned leader.
Randeep Singh Surjewala is more understandable. Any judgement that does not criticise his party's antagonists is ipso facto incorrect. He argues that this judgement is contrary to a pronouncement of the Supreme Court. What did the SC say? It said that the demolition was an egregious violation of the rule of law. The present judgement accepts this and goes on to conclude that the culprits are different; they are not the accused in this case.
The judge of the CBI court has delivered a reasoned verdict. Unfortunately, in our present scheme of things , he will get pilloried because he has been reasonable. It is now open season for unfair criticism of any fair judgement.
No comments:
Post a Comment