The capture of Disha Ravi

  Rule of law not a concession given by State to residents

Youthful lobbyist Disha Ravi's capture in Bengaluru in the 'tool compartment case' and the resulting request of a Delhi court sending her to five-day police remand have brought up certain major issues which go much past the standard discussion over free discourse and option to disagree. The procedures before a Duty Magistrate in New Delhi for this situation have uncovered procedural escape clauses that conflict with the standard of law — viewed as a sine qua non in a majority rule government. Charges are that the 22-year-elderly person was not addressed by an advice of her decision at the hour of the consultation. Assuming valid, it's a genuine procedural pass. Preferably, she ought to have been permitted to have her own direction. Article 22 of the Constitution demands that no individual who is captured will be denied the option to counsel and to be shielded by a lawful expert of their decision. Questions have additionally been raised over the Delhi Police not looking for travel remand to carry her to the public capital from Bengaluru.

The world watched Ajmal Kasab slaughtering honest individuals in Mumbai in the 26/11 dread assaults. In any case, rather than executing him immediately, the Indian legal framework gave him an appropriate preliminary. That shows our obligation to established qualities and the standard of law. Article 21 says, 'No individual will be denied of his life or individual freedom besides as indicated by system set up by law.' In Maneka Gandhi's case (1978), the top court said, 'The method recommended by law must be reasonable, just and sensible, not whimsical, severe or subjective.'

Notwithstanding the nature of the allegations, her rights as an accused or a detenu can’t be given the go-by. Also, procedural justice is equally important. The alleged lapses need to be looked into and corrected, if needed, by superior courts. The rule of law is not a concession given by the State to its citizens, and, therefore, it must not depend on the benevolence of the law enforcement agencies. Courts are expected to exercise checks on the misuse of powers by the executive — particularly those affecting the most cherished right to life and liberty guaranteed under Article 21 — to ensure that the rule of law is preserved and protected.