Two tracks of justice: ordinary citizens vs. VIPs

 


The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act was enacted with one principle in mind: speedy justice for the most vulnerable. It sets strict timelines—evidence of the victim must be recorded within 30 days, and trials concluded within one year. In countless cases involving ordinary citizens, the law has shown its teeth. Accused men are swiftly arrested, denied bail, and sentenced with little delay. The system works with remarkable speed when the accused have no influence, money or political clout.

But the story takes a different turn when the accused is a VIP. The POCSO Act’s urgency suddenly slows. Adjournments pile up. Interim stays drag on. High-profile lawyers stretch proceedings, while governments tread cautiously. What was meant to be a law of uncompromising swiftness turns hesitant, almost deferential.

The ongoing case against former Karnataka Chief Minister B. S. Yediyurappa has thrown this double standard into sharp relief. The High Court stayed proceedings against him, and despite the law’s time-bound mandate, the state government has not shown urgency in getting the stay vacated. The case remains in limbo. The contrast is glaring: in the very same Karnataka, ordinary men accused under POCSO languish in jail and are tried without delay.

This is the two-speed justice system that corrodes faith in democracy. The principle of equality before law is reduced to a slogan when powerful individuals can sidestep the speed of justice that crushes the powerless. It is not about guilt or innocence—that must be decided in court. It is about whether the process itself is applied evenly.

If democracy is to mean anything more than periodic elections, it must guarantee fairness in the rule of law. Today, however, it often looks like the law has two faces: stern and swift for the weak, indulgent and sluggish for the powerful. That is not what the framers of the Constitution envisaged, nor what citizens deserve.

The POCSO Act was designed to protect children, not to bend under political weight. If its timelines can be ignored in VIP cases, the credibility of the law itself stands weakened. A democracy that cannot ensure equal justice risks becoming a democracy in name only.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Karnataka Bank’s Course Correction: From Bureaucratic Blunder To Restoring Trust With Homegrown Leadership

When Prestige Is Gifted, Not Earned: The Padma Vibhushan Controversy Of Veerendra Heggade

Why I Will Never Fly Air India Again