I-T appellate tribunal dismiss cases against UP CM Akhilesh and his wife; Rules are bent for the convenience of the high and mighty
Law is an ass. If you have doubt, then look at the manner inwhich corruption cases against the high and mighty of the land are dealt with.Take for instance the manner in which the income tax appellate tribunalexonerated UP chief minister Akhilesh Yadav and his wife Dimple Yadav of thecharges of using ill-gotten money to purchase a prime property in the mostdubious manner.
Yadav had bought a palatial bungalow on the tonyVikramaditya Marg, which is the heart of Lucknow city, on a price which wasgrossly undervalued. The manner in which the transaction was done was patentlysubversive if not criminal to say the least about seven years ago when hisfather Mulayam Singh Yadav was the chief minister. On the day of the purchase,he got over Rs 40 lakh deposited into his account and withdrew it in cash topurchase the property from a Delhi-based real estate agent.
The year 2004-5 was not the time when the Yadavs shared thebest of relations with the UPA regime. With Amar Singh still acting asMulayam’s alter ego, he was unrestrained in taking a pot shot at UPAchairperson Sonia Gandhi and the Congress. The transaction left a trail whichprompted the I-T sleuths to smell a rat. They served a notice to the Yadavsabout the deal which was evidently not above board.
Since 2005 much water has flowed down Gomti in Lucknow andYamuna in New Delhi. Mulayam lost the election in 2007 and felt the heat of avindictive state government headed by Mayawati. The wrestler-turned-politiciandid a somersault and reached out to the UPA for shelter. He and his familymembers were accused of corruption in various real estate deals. The CBI andthe I-T sleuths were let loose on them.
But 2009 was the turning point when Mualaym Singh Yadav cameto the rescue of the Manmohan singh government on the issue of Indo-US nucleardeal. Since then, the CBI and I-T department began conducting the investigationin a manner suited best to giving the benefit of doubt to the accused. In thesupreme court, the prosecution (the union government) showed no inclination topursue the case against the Yadavs on criminal charges.
But the manner in which the I-T appellate tribunal hasdismissed the cases against Akhilesh and Dimple speaks volumes aboutamenability of the rules and law according to the convenience of the high andmighty. Obviously, Akhilesh could take a ridiculous plea of ignorance and getaway with it. He is believed to have cited his young age (32 years at thattime) as handicap in being conversant with the law of the land. His plea foundfavour with the I-T authorities. It is another matter that only six yearslater, he qualified to be the chief minister of the country’s largest state.Akhilesh’s case is not an isolated instance that confirms the asinine nature oflaw. And this will obviously not be the last one.
