In the Shadow of Power: How Cases of Harassment Involving Political Houses Vanish into the Black Hole of Court Files

They arrive at court carrying what every survivor brings: memories reconstructed from fragments, fear intertwined with hope, and the fragile expectation that the law will truly listen. Yet, in far too many corridors meant for justice, a quieter and more insidious force prevails: undue influence distorts procedure, case files languish without action, witnesses withdraw their statements, and investigative threads unravel before they ever reach the trial stage.

This is not a fable; it is a recurring pattern, evidenced in news headlines, documented in judicial decisions, and murmured in the corridors of courthouses. High-profile cases, be it a district-shaking incident of sexual violence or serious allegations against prominent political figures, reveal a common structure of deliberate delay: local police suspected of procedural stalling, frequent transfers of investigative officers, witness intimidation, and calculated legal manoeuvres that risk reducing vital, living testimony to mere historical record. Cases like Unnao and Kathua have demonstrated that widespread public outrage can compel the resumption of stalled proceedings. Yet, they also highlight how persistent delay and interference can ultimately jeopardise the pursuit of truth. Where political influence and familial ties converge, the risks to justice are heightened. Those with access to power can orchestrate tactical interventions: cases are shifted across jurisdictions, evidentiary challenges are mounted on procedural technicalities, and, most concerningly, witnesses are intimidated into silence. Courts have frequently intervened, ordering procedural safeguards, transferring trials, and extending protection to victims when local mechanisms have demonstrated susceptibility to compromise. In the Kathua case, for instance, the Supreme Court ordered a change of venue and heightened security for the victim’s family due to credible concerns of local interference; subsequently, even the conduct of certain investigators came under scrutiny. BJP MLA’s son Prateek Chauhan (Bidar / Karnataka), Ex-RJD minister’s son accused in a rape case (Bihar / Samastipur), Appointment controversy Vikas Barala (son of BJP Rajya Sabha MP Subhash Barala). These files are not mere papers; they are silent graves of cases buried, twisted, or derailed until justice itself becomes unrecognisable. Is our legal system designed only for the poor and the powerless? Do the laws of this nation not extend to those who sit in high office?

How ironic that they govern by our mandate, under the authority of our votes, yet exploit the very citizens who empower them. Their children enjoy VVIP privilege, while the common citizen, whose tax money fuels the entire system, is left to fight for basic dignity.

Article 14, equality before the law is a guaranteed fundamental right. Under Article 19, we have the freedom to question and demand accountability. Under Article 32, we have the right to seek justice when those rights are violated. So why is demanding an account of our own money treated like an act of rebellion?

A democracy cannot function on selective justice. If the law bends for the influential and breaks for the ordinary, then the Constitution becomes a mere decorative document respected in speeches but ignored in courtrooms. Today, corruption and harassment have become a fashion statement for those in power. Ask them a question, and suddenly we are labelled terrorists. Demand an answer, and they respond like the uneducated dodging every fact, twisting every truth.

Our nation is being led by leaders who neither possess vision nor basic awareness. I doubt even 10% of our political representatives are truly well-educated. Most carry some form of criminal charges, yet they occupy positions of authority with ease. Is there a clause in our Constitution that says you must have a criminal background to qualify for politics?

How can individuals who cannot differentiate between AQI and IQ be trusted with the development of our capital? The first needs of this country are education, healthcare, and housing, not forced sermons on religion. But perhaps they genuinely believe holy books will solve poverty, pollution, illiteracy, and our collapsing civic sense issues they themselves have failed to address.

Instead of governing, they spend their time hiding their crimes or blaming others for them. And the people? Reduced to the tigers of their circus performing only when ordered, punished when resisting, and controlled through the whip of power.

A democracy cannot prosper under the shadow of ignorance and criminality. It thrives only when leadership is accountable, educated, and bound by the rule of law, not above it. The Snoopgate controversy remains one of the least publicly discussed yet most politically sensitive episodes in recent Indian legal history. What surfaced as allegations of state-sponsored surveillance on a young woman quickly transformed into a national debate on privacy, misuse of power, and the limits of executive authority.

Anyone who has ever searched the case online knows that multiple high-ranking officials were named in petitions, reports, and media investigations. The then–Chief Minister Narendra Modi’s name appeared in several allegations, not as a proven offender, but as part of the political context surrounding the case. Yet, instead of a transparent, judicially monitored inquiry, the controversy seemed to dissolve with time, absorbed into the dark corners of bureaucratic silence.A case that demanded clarity was quietly close,d almost buried in the metaphorical coffin of the court’s forgotten files. The larger concern goes beyond one particular case. If allegations of unauthorised surveillance on a woman by those occupying positions of power can fade without answers, what protection does the ordinary citizen have?

The Constitution guarantees the Right to Privacy as a fundamental right under Justice Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017). It ensures equality before the law under Article 14, and protection from arbitrary state action under Article 21.

Yet, when the powerful walk through political storms untouched, these rights risk becoming mere decorative principles. India today feels like it is living under an invisible emergency, unspoken yet deeply felt. In a democracy where questioning power is branded as rebellion and demanding accountability is seen as defiance, justice cannot flourish. A nation cannot progress when transparency becomes optional, criminal allegations follow political convenience, VVIP privilege shields the influential, and laws bend differently for the powerful and the ordinary. India’s real obstacles are not the poor or the uneducated but a system where influence outweighs integrity. True justice demands equal protection for sons and daughters, mandatory independent inquiries into allegations against any political figure, and a legal structure where no office or status provides immunity. The Constitution never endorsed leaders with criminal baggage, yet this distortion persists. The Snoopgate controversy is a reminder that a democracy survives only when its laws are stronger than its leaders and its people stronger than their fear. Only then can India call itself truly free.

“Power bends paperwork, but it cannot bend justice forever; even the darkest file glows when the law reopens it.”