'Adoption of geographically-defined label arbitrary, unwarranted': Delhi court on liquor scam case

The court observed that it is 'equally significant' that no comparable regional descriptor has been used for the remaining accused people and the prosecution narrative does not speak of any 'North Group' or similar categorisation.

New Delhi: The CBI's "repeated and deliberate" use of 'South Group' to describe accused from South India in the liquor scam case came under criticism from a Delhi court, which said the adoption of a geographically-defined label was "plainly arbitrary and unwarranted".

The court, while discharging AAP chief Arvind Kejriwal and 22 others in the case, observed that it is "equally significant" that no comparable regional descriptor has been used for the remaining accused people and the prosecution narrative does not speak of any "North Group" or similar categorisation.

Placing its concern over "repeated and deliberate" use of 'South Group' ostensibly on the basis of their regional origin or place of residence, it said such a nomenclature finds no foundation in law, does not correspond to any legally cognisable classification, and is wholly alien to the statutory framework governing criminal liability.

"The concern is not confined to semantics. Region-based labelling carries an avoidable undertone and is capable of creating a prejudicial impression. It detracts from the settled requirement that criminal proceedings must remain dispassionate, evidence-centric, and insulated from extraneous considerations," it said.

Cautioning the CBI to exercise "greater care, circumspection and restraint" in the choice of language while drafting charge-sheets and investigative narratives, the court said descriptions of accused persons must remain "strictly neutral, evidence-based and free from expressions that carry a stigmatic, divisive, or pejorative overtone".

The court made it clear that the continued use of such terminology bears directly upon the fairness of the criminal process and touches upon the guarantee of a "just, fair and reasonable" procedure under Article 21 of the Constitution, it said.

Equally, it said, the employment of descriptors founded on regional or identity-based distinctions, in the absence of any rational nexus with the alleged offence, is inconsistent with the constitutional command of equality and non-discrimination under Article 15.

"Persistence with such nomenclature risks undermining the due process of law and is best avoided in the interest of an impartial and constitutionally compliant administration of criminal justice," it said.

The court said the expression 'South Group' has been repeatedly employed in successive charge-sheets and for that limited reason alone, it has been constrained to refer to it while summarising and analysing the prosecution case. It said such reference "cannot, however, be construed as approval or endorsement" of the terminology itself.

The continued use of this label, despite the absence of any legally sustainable basis, carries a real risk of colouring perception, causing unintended prejudice, and diverting focus from the evidentiary material, which alone must guide adjudication, it added.