Does it apply to Allahabad high court only?

Posted: December 14, 2010 in Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , , ,

Digvijay Singh first said that Karkare made a telephonic call to him a few days before his death on the threat from Hindu extremists.

He later changed the tune to say that Karkare did not talk to him but he talked to Karkare, and that he has the proof to substantiate his claim.

He now says that he does not have the proof, but it is not the first time he is saying what he said about Karkare. As if that is the proof.

Former chief justice of India KG Balakrishnan had earlier said that there was no mention of a minister (Telecon Raja) in the letter sent to him about ministerial interference in cases.

After former Madras high court CJ, HL Gokhale came out with the detail that Balakrishnan had indeed been sent the letter about Raja’s alleged interference, he is trying to gloss over the matter.

Not much difference between the slipshod defence by Digvijay and the wriggling out manner of KG Balakrishnan. Only the latter seems to be uncomfortable while the former is a practiced prevaricator. A confirmed pretender.

One is reminded of the supreme court’s comment about the Allahabad high court.

But one has to extend its application.

There is indeed something rotten in public life in India.

Comments are closed.