This is in response to the opinion column by Dr. R.K.

Raghavan titled Reversal of a

Dangerous Trend, published in your newspaper on 25 Nov 2011. The central theme
of the article is indeed undebatable: namely that the judiciary should not be
influenced by media or popular public sentiment. However, I would like to take
exception to the following paragraph from the letter:
For instance, if a person.shows an unmistakable proclivity to violence, the
judge could not be expected to be lenient and unleash him on unwary members of
society by granting bail. But when the offence is one involving a white collar crime,
physical danger to society at large is seldom conceivable.
The objection is to the suggestions that
a. a person committing such a crime will under no circumstances pose a
physical danger to any member of society
b. that physical danger to individuals of a society is the only danger for which
incarceration during trial is necessary
c. both the above points implying that a person committing a white collar
crime be afforded special consideration by the judicial system.
First, it would be naive to assume that any person charged with irregular
transactions running into hundreds of crores of rupees, if not more and looking
at extended jail time if convicted, will never indulge in tampering with evidence
or intimidating witnesses (and act which clearly poses physical danger to the
witnesses).
Secondly, it is the implication that people who indulge in white collar crimes,
especially those mentioned in this article, pose no threat to society when present
in society. The rape of natural resources (going with the theme of the para.
above from Dr. Raghavans article) allegedly perpetrated by the defendants will
inflict a huge long term damage on the society.