A Dark Day for Justice in India: Analyzing the Implications of Mr. Kejriwal's Conditional Bail

 

A Dark Day for Justice in India: Analyzing the Implications of Mr. Kejriwal's Conditional Bail

Kejriwal Out on Bail

 

Today, the Supreme Court of India granted bail to Mr. Arvind Kejriwal, a significant political figure and the Chief Minister of Delhi. However, this decision was not without conditions, a fact that has sparked a range of reactions across the country. While some celebrate this as a victory for truth and justice, I find myself compelled to disagree. This event, in my view, highlights deeper issues within India's justice system and raises concerns about the integrity of the country’s democratic institutions.

It is crucial to note that the Supreme Court did not grant Mr. Kejriwal an unconditional release. Instead, the Court imposed specific conditions, effectively limiting his actions while on bail. This decision raises a critical question: Mr. Kejriwal is presumed innocent because he has not yet been tried in court, and under the law, one is innocent until proven guilty. Many believe that he will be found innocent when his case is finally heard, so why were such restrictions necessary? Has the court failed once again to stand with the innocent and instead bowed down to the powers that be? The answer, I fear, lies not in the pursuit of justice but in the ongoing manipulation of the judicial system by those in power.

The imposition of conditions on Mr. Kejriwal’s bail serves as a stark reminder of how the judiciary, which should be the bulwark of democracy, is being bent to the will of the government. While Mr. Kejriwal’s voice has been freed from the confines of prison, his authority has been significantly checked. This is an injustice to the people of Delhi, who elected Mr. Kejriwal to serve their interests. If the public believes he is guilty, they have the right to remove him from office in the next election. This selective justice, where high-profile individuals seem to receive a semblance of fairness while countless others languish in prison on dubious charges, paints a grim picture of the current state of the Indian judiciary.

The Prime Minister’s presence inside the Chief Justice of India's house on the pretext of a holy celebration further confirms that the justice system in India can no longer be trusted, as it appears to be controlled by politicians who are driven by ego and a sense of invincibility, disregarding the rights of others.

This case is not an isolated incident. It is symptomatic of a larger issue: the erosion of public confidence in India's justice system. Historically, governments have come and gone, but the judicial system's integrity has always been paramount. When the people of a nation lose faith in their courts, it takes years—if not decades—to restore that trust. Unfortunately, under the current government, this faith is rapidly eroding.

The British were expelled from India not merely because of their oppressive rule but because they lost the people's trust in their judicial system. The same can be said of the Mughals, whose rule was generally accepted as long as justice was seen to be fairly administered. The legacy of Emperor Jahangir, known for his just rule, still resonates in Indian history. In contrast, Emperor Aurangzeb’s reign is remembered for its oppressive policies, which eventually led to the decline of the Mughal Empire.

Similarly, the current Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) government risks being remembered as one that undermined the judicial system to serve its interests. By leveraging the courts to suppress opposition and stifle free speech, they are following a dangerous precedent that could have long-lasting consequences for Indian democracy.

While Mr. Kejriwal's case has garnered significant media attention, it is essential to remember the countless others who do not have the same privileges. Many individuals languish in prisons across India, unable to afford high-profile lawyers or attract media attention. These people, often imprisoned on questionable charges, have become victims of a system that is increasingly seen as biased and corrupt. The fear of the judiciary and its perceived alignment with government interests prevents many from speaking out, perpetuating a cycle of injustice.

This selective application of justice was also evident during the Emergency imposed by Mrs. Indira Gandhi in 1975. While the nation was acutely aware of the restrictions on free speech and the curtailment of civil liberties, there was at least a clear understanding of the rules. People knew what to expect, and as long as their basic needs were met, there was a degree of acceptance. Today, however, the situation is far more insidious. The current government’s actions are cloaked in the guise of religion and national welfare, making it harder for the public to discern the erosion of their rights.

As the BJP continues to consolidate power through means that many view as unethical, the Indian public is slowly awakening to the reality of the last decade. The conditional bail granted to Mr. Kejriwal is not just a legal matter; it is a reflection of a much larger issue—the manipulation of the judiciary to serve political ends.

In the coming months, as elections approach in states like Haryana, Maharashtra, Jharkhand, and Jammu & Kashmir, the political landscape may shift. Politicians who have been living under the shadow of fear may find the courage to speak out, and the people of India may finally begin to lift the dark clouds of injustice that have hung over the nation for too long.

India’s justice system is at a crossroads. The decisions made today will shape the future of the nation for generations to come. It is imperative that the judiciary remains independent and that justice is administered without bias. Only then can the people of India truly believe in the system that is meant to protect their rights and freedoms.

The legacy of the current government will be judged not only by its economic policies or electoral successes but by how it upholds—or undermines—the principles of justice. As citizens, we must remain vigilant and demand accountability, for the strength of our democracy, depends on it.