While denying bail to former UP MLA Mukhtar Ansari in a case wherein he has been accused of registering an ambulance on forged and fabricated document, the Allahabad High Court in an extremely laudable, learned, landmark and latest judgment titled Mukhtar Ansari vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. In Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. – 1776 of 2022 and cited in 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 338 minced absolutely no words to observe that, “It is irony and tragedy of the Indian republic and biggest scar on Indian democracy that criminals like Mukhtar Ansari are the law-makers.” Absolutely right! There can be just no denying or disputing it!
The million dollar question is: Why is it that Centre right from 1947 till 2022 very strongly feels that for getting a job in police or in army or in judiciary there should be strictest scrutiny and even if one case is found to be registered in any police station then that itself would be sufficient to bar him/her from getting the government job and he/she would be straightaway disqualified. On the contrary, if a person commits 100 murders or 100 rape or 100 dacoities or any other crime or even comes from underworld then also still he/she would be eligible to contest elections even from jail and there would be no bar until and unless he/she is finally convicted! This is the nub of the problem!
Furthermore, it must be also asked: Why are MPs and MLAs allowed to insult Speaker inside Parliament or State Assembly and still get away by just being suspended for few days as we see right now happening in our Parliament itself? Has this not reduced our democracy to a farce? Why are politicians given long rope everywhere?
What’s more: Why leaders like BJP MP Varun Gandhi wants that just like Centre has started Agniveer scheme for army soldiers to be recruited for just 4 years similarly politicians-veer yojana is started for politicians also and term of MP and MLA is made just 2 or 3 years? Why are politicians never ready to have most strictest standards for politicians also? Why politicians never favour police-veer yojana just like we see being done proudly in Army where we see maximum corruption as opposed to Army which still enjoys a fairly clean reputation and why is it that even the historic recommendations made by the Apex Court in Prakash Singh case in 2006 are shamelessly still lying just unattended, unaddressed and unimplemented?
Needless to say, this is exactly the root of the problem which our lawmakers that is politicians are never ready to address no matter which government comes to power in Centre! No wonder, we see every now and then huge scams being bursted as we saw recently in West Bengal and hundreds of crores of cash being recovered by ED in house of close aides of senior politicians and Ministers who are solely responsible for recruitment in public services and who select worthless candidates after taking huge bribes! Why there is no death penalty for such corrupt politicians or even life term? Why politicians are never ready to hang their colleagues or send them to prison for life when they indulge in massive corruption? This is exactly what makes a complete mockery of our democratic system as we see operating in our country due to which we are ridiculed everywhere but our politicians care a least as they don’t want to ever address it!
Anyway, coming back to the present case, this brief, brilliant, bold and balanced judgment authored by a Single Judge Bench comprising of Hon’ble Mr Dinesh Kumar Singh of Allahabad High Court sets the ball rolling by first and foremost putting forth in para 2 that, “The present application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking bail in FIR No.369 of 2021, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B, 177 and 506 IPC and Section 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Barabanki after the bail application of the accused-applicant has been rejected by the Special Judge (MP/MLA)/Additional District Judge, Court No.4, Barabanki on 13.12.2021 in Bail Application No.2824 of 2021.”
To put things in perspective, the Bench then envisages in para 3 that, “As per the allegations in the FIR, an ambulance bearing registration no.UP 41 AT 7171 was registered in the Road Transport Office, Barabanki on 21.12.2013 in the name of Dr. Alka Rai, R/o 56, Rafi Nagar, Barabanki. A letter was submitted that the said ambulance would be attached to Sanjeevani Hospital and Research Center Private Limited, National Highway-24, G.T. Road, Mau. However, on 1.4.2021 it came to the notice that the said ambulance was being run without fitness and insurance as the fitness of the said ambulance got expired on 31.1.2017. The Road Transport Office issued notice on 23.1.2020 to the alleged owner of the said ambulance on the address, which was given at the time of registration of the vehicle. At the time of registration, the said vehicle got registered in the name of Dr. Alka Rai, 56, Rafi Nagar, Barabanki, for which the relevant papers such as Voter Identity Card of the said address were submitted and the Registration Officer believing the genuineness of the documents submitted, registered the said vehicle to the address given at the time of registration. However, it was found that the said Voter Identity Card was forged and fabricated document. There was no such address of 56, Rafi Nagar, Barabanki, but there was an address in nearby locality, House No.56, Abhay Nagar and in the said house, one Pradeep Mishra was living with his family. It was said that no one in the name of Dr. Alka Rai ever lived in Rafi Nagar or Abhay Nagar, and the papers submitted at the time of registration of the said ambulance were forged and fabricated documents.”
Furthermore, the Bench then observes in para 4 that, “This FIR was registered against co-accused, Dr. Alka Rai. However, during the course of investigation, the name of the accused-applicant figured, and it was found that the real beneficiary and user of the said vehicle was the present accused-applicant and he got the said vehicle purchased in the name of Dr. Alka Rai by pressurizing her and the payment was allegedly made by him.”
As we see, the Bench then discloses in para 5 that, “It has been submitted on behalf of the State that the accused-applicant is a known Mafia, Don and Gangster. He has been elected five times for the Legislative Assembly of the Uttar Pradesh from Mau Constituency and three times while he was in jail. His name is well known in the crime world and he is the biggest ‘bahubali’ of the State of Uttar Pradesh. He has created an empire in the crime world with the proceeds of crime. To his credit, there are as many as 56 criminal cases, in which 14 are murder cases under Section 302 along with 364-A and 307 IPC etc. Other cases are also for commission of the serious offences by him. He enjoys the image of Robin-hood and because of his terror, witnesses do not date to depose against him, and if someone dares, he would be finished.”
Be it noted, the Bench then further discloses in para 6 that, “The criminal history of the accused-applicant, which has been placed on record along with supplementary counter affidavit on behalf of the State, is extracted herein under:-
“1. NCR No.219 of 1978, under section 506 IPC,
2. Case Crime No.169 of 1986, under Section 302 IPC,
3. Case Crime No.106 of 1988, under Section 302 IPC,
4. Case Crime No.410 of 1988, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302 and 307 IPC,
5. NCR No.233 of 1988, under Sections 504 and 506 IPC,
6. Case Crime No.124 of 1990, under Sections 364, 395 and 397 IPC,
7. Case Crime No.399 of 1990, under Sections 147, 148, 149 and 307 IPC,
8. Case Crime No.682 of 1990, under Sections 147 and 506 IPC,
9. Case Crime No.266 of 1990, under Sections 467, 468, 420, 120-B IPC,
10. Case Crime No.44 of 1991, under Section 302 IPC,
11. Case Crime No.172 of 1991, under Sections 147, 148 and 302 IPC,
12. Case Crime No.294 of 1991, under Sections 307 and 302 IPC,
13. Case Crime No.229 of 1991, under Sections 147, 148, 149 and 302 IPC,
14. Case Crime No.456 of 1993, under Sections 365 and 387 IPC,
15. Case Crime No.503 of 1993, under Section 5 TADA,
16. Case Crime No.834 of 1995, under Sections 353, 504 and 506 IPC,
17. Case Crime No.165 of 1996, under Sections 323, 352 and 307 IPC,
18. Case Crime No.192 of 1996, under Section 3(1) U.P. Gangster Act,
19. Case Crime No.264 of 1996, NSA,
20. Case Crime No.237 of 1996, under Sections 120, 135, 136 Lo.Pra. Adhi.;
21. Case Crime No.19 of 1997, under Sections 364A, 365, 302, 120-B and 34 IPC;
22. NCR No.19 of 1997, under Section 506 IPC,
23. Case Crime No.121 of 1997, under Section 364A IPC;
24. Case Crime No.377 of 1997, under Section 506 IPC;
25. Case Crime No.58 of 1998, NSA;
26. Case Crime No.33 of 1999, NSA;
27. Case Crime No.17 of 1999, under Section 506 IPC;
28. Case Crime No.60 of 1999, under Sections 419, 420, 109 and 120-B IPC;
29. Case Crime No.106 of 1999, under Sections 307, 302 and 120-B IPC;
30. Case Crime No.126 of 1999, under Section 506 IPC;
31. Case Crime No.428 of 1999, under Section 2/3 U.P. Gangster Act;
32. Case Crime No.66 of 2000, under Sections 147, 336, 353 and 506 IPC;
33. Case Crime No.209 of 2002, under Section 3/7/25 Arms Act;
34. Case Crime No.131 of 2003, under Sections 353, 504 and 506 IPC;
35. Case Crime No.9A of 2004, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307 IPC;
36. Case Crime No.808 of 2004, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 393, 307, 507, 506, 504 and 342 IPC;
37. Case Crime No.493 of 2005, under Sections 302, 506 and 120-B IPC;
38. Case Crime No.589 of 2005, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 404, 120-B IPC and Section 7 Criminal Law amendment Act;
39. Case Crime No.1580 of 2005, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 435, 436, 153A IPC;
40. Case Crime No.1051 of 2007, under Section Gangster Act;
41. Case Crime No.361 of 2009, under Sections 302, 120-B IPC and Section 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act;
42. Case Crime No.1182 of 2009, under Sections 307, 506 and 120-B IPC;
43. Case Crime No.66 of 2009, under Section 3 Makoka Act;
44. Case Crime No.1866 of 2009, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 302, 325, 404, 120-B IPC and Section 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act;
45. Case Crime No.399 of 2010, under Sections 302, 307, 120-B, 34 IPC, Section 7 Criminal Law Amendment act and Section 25 Arms Act;
46. Case Crime No.482 of 2010, under Section 3(1) U.P. Gangster Act;
47. Case Crime No.891 of 2010, under U.P. Gangster Act;
48. Case Crime No.20 of 2014, under Section 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 506, 120-B IPC and Section 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act;
49. Case Crime No.05 of 2019, under Sections 386 and 506 IPC;
50. Case Crime No.04 of 2020, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B IPC Section 30 Arms Act;
51. Case Crime No.160 of 2020, under Section 3(1) U.P. Gangster Act;
52. Case Crime No.236 of 2020, under Sections 468, 471, 120-B IPC and Section 3 Sa.Sa.Nu, Adhi;
53. Case Crime No.55 of 2021, under Section 3(1) U.P. Gangster Act;
54. Case Crime No.369 of 2021, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B, 506, 177 IPC and Section 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act;
55. Case Crime No.121 of 2021, under Section 25/26 Arms Act; and
56. Case Crime No.185 of 2021, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC;.”
To be sure, the Bench then states in para 7 that, “It is alleged that the aforesaid vehicle was recovered from Mohali, Punjab, which was being used by the accused-applicant and his henchmen for going to the court from jail. His henchmen would travel in the said ambulance armed with sophisticated weapons to escort him.”
Most significantly, what is most captivating and what forms the cornerstone of this learned judgment is then laid bare in para 8 wherein it is pointed out that, “It is irony and tragedy of the Indian republic and biggest scar on Indian democracy that criminals like the present accused-applicant are the law-makers. This Court in its judgment and order dated 7.6.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.5473 of 2022 while taking serious view on increasing criminalisation of politics and criminals reaching Parliament and State Legislature, has observed as under:-
“16. No one can dispute that the present day politics is caught in crime, identity, patronage, muscle and money network. Nexus between crime and politics is serious threat to democratic values and governance based on rule of law. Elections of Parliament and State Legislature and even for local bodies and panchayats are very expensive affairs. The record would show that the elected members of Lok Sabha with criminal records are extremely wealthier candidates. For example, in 2014 Lok Sabha election 16 out of 23 winners having criminal charges in their credit related to murder were multi-millionaire. After candidates get re-elected, their wealth and income grows manyfold which is evident from the fact that in 2014, 165 M.Ps. who got re-elected, their average wealth growth was Rs.7.5 Crores in 5 years.
17. Earlier, “Bahubalis” and other criminals used to provide support to candidates on various considerations including caste, religion and political shelter but now criminals themselves are entering into politics and getting elected as the political parties do not have any inhibition in giving tickets to candidates with criminal background including those having heinous offence(s) registered against them. Confirmed criminal history sheeters and even those who are behind bars are given tickets by different political parties and surprisingly some of them get elected as well.
18. It is the responsibility of the Parliament to show its collective will to restrain the criminals from entering into the politics, Parliament or legislature to save democracy and the country governed on democratic principles and rule of law.
19. There is responsibility of civil society as well to rise above the parochial and narrow considerations of caste, community etc and to ensure that a candidate with criminal background does not get elected. Criminalization of politics and corruption in public life have become the biggest threats to idea of India, its democratic polity and world’s largest democracy. There is an unholy alliance between organized crime, the politicians and the bureaucrats and this nexus between them have become pervasive reality. This phenomenon has eroded the credibility, effectiveness, and impartiality of the law enforcement agencies and administration. This has resulted into lack of trust and confidence in administration and justice delivery system of the country as the accused such as the present accused-applicant win over the witnesses, influence investigation and tamper with the evidence by using their money, muscle and political power. Alarming number of criminals reaching Parliament and State Assembly is a wake up call for all. Parliament and Election Commission of India are required to take effective measures to wean away criminals from politics and break unholy nexus between criminal politicians and bureaucrats.
20. This unholy nexus and unmindfulness of political establishment is the result of reaching person like the accused-applicant, a gangster, hardened criminal and “Bahubali” to the Parliament and becoming a law maker. This Court, looking at the heinousness of offence, might of the accused, evidence available on record, impact on society, possibility of accused tampering with the evidence and influencing/ winning over the witnesses by using his muscle and money power does not find that there is a ground to enlarge the accused-applicant on bail at this stage. This bail application is thus, rejected.”
Quite significantly, the Bench then reveals in para 9 that, “Dr. Alka Rai in her statement said that under pressure and fear of the present accused-applicant, she signed on some papers brought by his men and her signatures were taken on the blank letter pad of the hospital along with seal etc. She further said that she met with the present accused-applicant in jail, and because of the manner in which the accused-applicant insisted to buy ambulance, out of fear and terror of the accused-applicant, she put her signatures on the papers brought by his men. This ambulance was being used by the accused-applicant and she could come to know this fact on 31.3.2021 that the present accused-applicant was using the said vehicle for going to the court in Mohali, Punjab from jail.”
While continuing in same vein, the Bench then also glaringly reveals in para 10 that, “She further said that after the news channel made the disclosure of the above incident, his men told her that what was required to be said by her to the police. If she was asked by the investigating agency, she would tell that she purchased the said vehicle by giving her permanent address at Barabanki and, thereafter, she was shifted to Mau, and she was running the ambulance from Mau itself. She was told to say that Afsa Ansari, wife of the accused-applicant had taken the said ambulance on rent 4-5 days before as she had to travel to Punjab to bring back her husband, ambulance would be required as she was having trouble/pain on her neck. Dr. Alka Rai was threatened that if she would not tell whatever was told, her hospital and she would be finished.”
To buttress what is stated above, the Bench then adds in para 11 that, “There are statements of other co-accused, who have corroborated the allegation against the accused-applicant regarding purchase of the said ambulance on the basis of the forged and fabricated documents in the name of Dr. Alka Rai for the use of the accused-applicant.”
It is worth noting that the Bench then mentions in para 12 that, “Anand Yadav, one of the co-accused, had said that one Surendra Sharma S/o Indrasen Sharma, Saleem S/o Badruddin and Firoz used to drive the said ambulance. The accused-applicant and his men, Afroz, Shahid and Zafar @ Chanda would keep sophisticated and modern illegal weapons in the said ambulance, which would accompany the accused-applicant. Once in Lucknow at Hazratganj Crossing, one Reporter clicked the photograph of the said ambulance, and then henchmen of the accused-applicant assaulted the said Reporter badly. All these persons are close, confident and associate of the accused-applicant.”
Most forthrightly, the Bench then hastens to add in para 16 that, “The long criminal history of the accused-applicant of most heinous offences and looking at the facts of the case that the ambulance was allegedly being used to carry his men armed with illegal and sophisticated weapons for his protection, this Court finds that there is no ground to enlarge the accused-applicant on bail. The accused-applicant commands un-parallel fear in the minds and hearts of the people that no one dares to challenge him and his men and his politics. If the accused-applicant is enlarged on bail, the apprehension of the prosecution that he would tamper with the evidence and influence the witnesses, cannot be ruled out.”
As a corollary, the Bench then mandates in para 17 that, “Considering all these aspects, this Court finds no ground to enlarge the accused-applicant on bail.”
Finally, the Bench then concludes by holding in para 18 that, “Bail application is accordingly rejected.”
In a nutshell, this most commendable, courageous, cogent and convincing judgment should serve as a strong wake-up call to Centre and Parliament to swing into action and bar criminals from becoming law makers. If still Centre and Parliament fails to apply strictest parameters for politicians and feels proud shamelessly, senselessly and stupidly by just launching Agniveer yojana for Army soldiers but giving a blank cheque to only politicians to freely commit crime and then contest elections as we see since last 75 years then this definitely tantamounts to making a complete stark mockery of our democratic system where politicians alone can get away even after doing anything, anywhere, anytime and still just not be accountable for except paying just lip service! Shame on our lawmakers if they still don’t fail to act to remove the biggest scar on Indian democracy as pointed out brilliantly by the Allahabad High Court so commendably in this notable case and be happy just by suspending MPs and MLAs for few days as we see right now happening in Parliament which has made us a laughing stock in front of the whole world!