The apex court sought the assistance of Fali S Nariman and AG Mukul Rohatgi in laying down a law to make ministers answerable for their public statements if it hurt public sentiments.
Samajwadi Party leader Azam Khan and minister in the Uttar Pradesh government, offered to tender an unconditional apology to the Bulandshahr gangrape victims for saying that their rape was a political conspiracy.
A Supreme Court bench led by Justices Dipak Mishra and Amitava Roy ordered Khan, through his counsel senior advocate Kapil Sibal, to tender the apology through an affidavit within two weeks.
The bench slammed Khan by asking how as an individual holding a public office, could be allowed to comment on the crime and state that “it is an outcome of political controversy.”
During the hearing Sibal submitted that “worse” statements were made by ministers in other government. Sibal further added that Khan’s statements had been misconstrued and attested that he never said “political conspiracy.”
Jurist Fali Nariman, the court appointed Amicus Curie, submitted that for the purpose of this case, an unconditional apology may be accepted, however, a law was needed to hold persons holding public office responsible for making statements that were disrespectful to victims of rape or molestation.
“Questions need to be framed and debated upon a decision be rendered so that before anyone, who holds a public office or authority, makes a statement, would be careful in respect of a victim, especially a victim of rape or molestation,” Nariman said.
The court responded that, “The controversy does not end here...we cannot send the respondent (Khan) to jail for but can definitely always impose fine on him as a public law remedy.”
Justice Mishra invited Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi to frame questions that could be debated upon, based on which a law could be rendered to make those holding public office responsible for statements they made in public.
Terming dignity of women as “uncompromisable,” on request of the complainant’s counsel advocate Kislay Pandey, the bench directed the state government to ensure that the minor victim was admitted in a central school of her father’s choice. “The Union of India shall see to it that the victim is admitted in the school, which is near to the petitioner's house. Needless to say, the expenses shall be borne by the State of U.P.
,” the bench said.
“The school administration where the girl shall be admitted shall see to it that she is treated with respect, for the dignity of a woman is absolutely uncompromisable with any kind of thought or concept or idea, which some time notioned in fancy,” the bench added.
The minor victim had approached the Supreme Court in August, seeking an FIR against Khan for allegedly saying “We need to investigate whether this is a political conspiracy by opponents who want to defame the government.” The girl had also appealed to the apex court to provide security and rehabilitation to her family.
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
 "Supreme Court")
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}