THESE EDUCATED CROOKS
In a news channel former CBI Director Madhavan who was darling of the media when he was investigating Bofors scandal, quoted verbatim the provisions of IPC 299 to prove that Justice Ahmadi infact erred in his judgment. 299(3) holds the accused responsible for culpable homicide not amounting to murder even if he./she knows his/her action could cause injury to the person/persons. He gave an analogy of a person bringing up a tiger to his household, locking up in a room and one fine morning this tiger breaks away and kills some neighbours. He can not obviously claim immunity under this section and claim to be charged for causing death due to negligence. Fine Mr.Madhavan ? If you have believed in what you said you could have filed a review petition you could have egged on any other volunteer to file a PIL at that time which precisely is the reason Ahmadi claims he stood by his judgment.
Ahmadi lied that none appealed for a review of his order changed track when an activist proved that infact he appealed for a review. Brushed aside allegations of conflict of interest as he was to head the Bhopal trust funded by Union Carbide on his superannuation.
All these honorable gentlemen need to ask their conscience as to if they had been fair to their own countrymen?
Abishek Manu singhvi was a solicitor for Dow Chemicals and he opined that the liabilities of erstwhile UCCIL shall not pass on to Dow Chemicals. He could have reclused himself as did NT Vanamamalai when he saw mounting evidence against Jayalalitha and he was approached to defend her that is professional ethics for you Mr Abishek.
|