Index Page                                Archives

Raja Bhaiya resigns after SC order on POTA

     Lucknow: Independent Uttar Pradesh legislator Raghuraj Pratap Singh, alias Raja Bhaiya, handed over his resignation to Chief Minister Mulayam singh Yadav after the Supreme Court's decision came on Thursday quashing the Government's decision to withdraw charges levelled against him under Prevention of Terrorism Act (POTA). However, Raja Bhaiya maintained that imposition of POTA against him was politically motivated but decided to resign on the moral basis. According to sources, Singh also would surrender before a Kanpur court in a week. The move came a few hours after a SC bench comprising Justice BN Agarwal and Justice AK Mathur ruled out that Mulayam Singh Government's decision withdrawing POTA charges against Raja Bhaiya, his father Uday Pratap Singh and another MLA Akshay Pratap Singh alias Gopalji was 'wrong'. The court also has transferred all the cases against Raja Bhaiya related to POTA, from Uttar Pradesh to Madhya Pradesh. The court had examined the documents relating to the invocation of POTA against Raghuraj Singh and its subsequent withdrawal by the Mulayam Singh Government. The petitions filed by S K Shukla, who was killed later and two others, residents of Pratapgarh, had challenged the state government's decision to withdraw POTA against Raja Bhaiya, his father and Gopalji. The petitioners had alleged that the trio's release from the jail posed a threat to their lives as they were witnesses to the case registered against them. The Mayawati Government had slapped POTA against them after they were arrested along with arms and ammunition, including AK-47 and AK-56 rifles. Immediately after Mulayam Singh Yadav was sworn in as the Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh, the State initiated steps to revoke the POTA charges against Raja Bhaiya. The State POTA Review Committee had later held that POTA charges could not have been invoked against Raja Bhaiya.

      In fact POTA, the law made with the intention of fighting terrorism, itself remained under controversy and a subject of politics since it's enactment. Prevention of Terrorism Act, enacted on March 28, 2002, had replaced the Prevention of Terrorism Ordinance (POTO) 2001. It was passed with 425 votes for the Act and 296 against, after a 10-hour debate in the parliament on March 26, 2002. However it was rejected by the upper house of the Parliament. The provisions contained under the POTA were mostly contained in existing laws, except those, which were contained in the Criminal Procedure Code, the Indian Penal Code, the Evidence Act or the Constitution of India. The Act effectively undermines the fundamental tenet of the criminal justice system by putting the burden of proof on the accused. But the Act also had some provisions, which were not attacked for being against human rights. These provisions stated that Confessions must be recorded within 48 hours before a magistrate, who will send the accused for a medical examination if there is a complaint of torture. Further a legal representative of the accused can be present for part of the interrogation. Moreover police officers can be prosecuted for abusing their authority. The POTA also provided that victims could be paid compensation. At the Peoples Tribunal on POTA and Other Security Legislation at the Press Club in New Delhi on July 16,2004 a 629-page report based on depositions made before the Tribunal by victims and their families from ten states in India, as well as expert depositions by lawyers and activists, showed that such security legislations grant sweeping powers to authorities, which has led to misuse of these powers and severe restriction of basic rights. At the same time, such legislation do not address the political, social and economic roots of the problem. The tribunal concluded that the review of victim and expert testimony showed that the misuse of the Act is inseparable from its normal use. The tribunal stated that the statute meant to terrorise not so much the terrorists as ordinary civilians and particularly the poor and disadvantaged such as dalits, religious minorities, advisees, and working people. Thus the tribunal recommended that POTA be repealed and that too in such a manner that the POTA charges are deleted from all existing investigations and trials. But, if the state so desires, these may continue under other laws and charges. Finally on September 17, 2004 the UPA Government approved ordinances to repeal the controversial Prevention of Terrorism Act, 2002 (POTA) and amend the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967.