This motion debates whether state governments retain lawful authority to initiate anti-corruption inquiries against individuals who now hold central constitutional posts, for alleged misconduct committed before their appointment.
Aaj ka motion yeh hai: 'State Governments Should Have Power to Probe Central Constitutional Officials for Past Misconduct' — yeh ek gahara sawaal hai ki hamare federal dhaanche mein accountability kaun sunit karega aur kis tak uskee pohanch hogi. Yeh ek legal awareness debate hai, koi court ka verdict nahi — main sirf ek balanced suggestion dungi, faisla nahi. Toh Counsel Aarav, aap pehle apna paksh rakhiye.
My lord, main yeh maanta hoon ki State Governments ko Central Constitutional Officials ke past misconduct ki jaanch karne ka adhikar hona chahiye — kyunki accountability ka sidhant kisi bhi officer ko, chahe woh kitna bhi oonche pad par ho, kanoon se upar nahi rakhta. Agar ek Constitutional Official ne apne pad se pehle ya baad mein koi galat kaam kiya hai, toh uss galat kaam ka shikaar hone wale log aksar usi State ke nagarik hote hain — toh unki niyaamak sanstha ko jaanch ka adhikar kyon nahi hoga? Federalism ka asli arth yahi hai — ki har star par jawabdehi honi chahiye, aur koi bhi institution impunity ki chadar mein chhup nahi sakta.
My Lord, main yeh maanti hoon ki corruption ek gambhir samasya hai — lekin Paksh yeh bhool raha hai ki Central constitutional officials ke liye ek poora, specialised framework pehle se maujood hai. Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013 ka Section 14 specifically Prime Minister, Union Ministers, aur Parliament Members ko Lokpal ke jurisdiction mein laata hai — yani Central ne apne officials ke liye apna accountability mechanism khud banaya hai. Agar State governments ko bhi yeh parallel jaanch-shakti de di jaaye, to ek hi conduct par multiple, competing investigations chalenge — jo na sirf constitutional federalism ka ulta hoga, balki Central officials ke zimmedaar kaamkaaj ko bhi paralyse kar dega.
Ref: THE LOKPAL AND LOKAYUKTAS ACT, 2013 · Section 14
My Lord, vipaksh kehta hai ki Central constitutional officials ke liye sirf Lokpal hi competent authority hai — lekin Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013 ka Section 14 khud yeh RESTRICT karta hai ki woh sirf Central Government se jude public servants ko cover karta hai; ek retired Central official jo ab State territory mein hai ya jiske conduct ka asar State ke logon par pada, woh Lokpal ke dayare mein automatically nahi aata. Aur My Lord, Kerala Public Men (Prevention of Corruption) Act, 1983 ka Section 22(2) yeh clearly preserve karta hai ki State ka Code of Criminal Procedure ke under criminal law ka use karne ka adhikar INTACT rehta hai — yeh bar sirf formal inquiry tak hai, criminal probe ka rasta band nahi hota. Isliye yeh kehna ki States ke paas koi probe power nahi, yeh ek incomplete aur misleading argument hai — motion ke favor mein yahi sach hai ki State ko yeh power honi chahiye.
Ref: THE LOKPAL AND LOKAYUKTAS ACT, 2013 · Section 14; KERALA PUBLIC MEN (PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION) ACT, 1983 · Section 22-2
My Lord, paksh ne jo kaha — ki States ko yeh power honi chahiye — woh ek constitutional fallacy hai, aur main seedha iska jawab dena chahti hoon. Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013 ki Section 14 ne Central constitutional officials — Prime Minister se lekar Group A officers tak — ke upar inquiry ka exclusive jurisdiction Lokpal ko diya hai; State machinery ko yeh power dena usi central framework ko undermine karna hoga. Aur Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 ki Section 17A ne bhi Central officials ki official functions se related decisions ke liye pehle sanction ki zaroorat rakhti hai — jo State Government se nahi, balki appropriate Central authority se aani chahiye — isliye States ko probe power dena poore constitutional design ke khilaf jaata hai.
Ref: THE LOKPAL AND LOKAYUKTAS ACT, 2013 · Section 14; Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 · Section 17A
Aaj ki is important debate mein, ek taraf yeh argument raha ki State governments ko Central constitutional officials ki past misconduct ki jaanch ka adhikaar hona chahiye — kyunki accountability ka daayra territorial nahi, functional hota hai. Doosri taraf, yeh strong point raha ki aisa adhikaar federalism ke balance ko bigaad sakta hai aur Central officials ki independence ko compromise kar sakta hai. Main yahan koi verdict nahi sunaungi — lekin ek balanced legal suggestion zaroor dungi: States apne existing Lokayukta frameworks aur Vigilance Commission mechanisms ko strengthen karein, jaise Mizoram Lokayukta Act 2014 ke Section 13 mein State-funded bodies tak jurisdiction ka model hai, aur Kerala Public Men Act 1983 ke Section 22(2) jaisi bar-provisions se seekh kar ek clear, constitutionally sound protocol banayein — jahan concurrent jurisdiction ke liye Supreme Court-supervised guidelines hon, taaki na federalism toote, na accountability kaafi rahe. Ab main citizens se request karungi ki is debate ko rate karein aur apni zimmedari nibhate hue apna view share karein!
Ref: MIZORAM LOKAYUKTA ACT, 2014 · Section 13; KERALA PUBLIC MEN (PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION) ACT, 1983 · Section 22-2