We Are Not Remedy For Everything: SC Rejects Plea for Probe Into Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose's Death

New Delhi: Rejecting petition seeking an inquiry into death of Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose, Supreme Court said on Monday that court is not remedy for every problem, and such matters are not under its purview.

top court noted that it can’t decide on such matters, and it is not judiciary's job to run government.

petitioner noted before apex court that Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose’s death still remains a mystery and no certain conclusion has been me relating to his disappearance.

'We Are Not Experts of Everything, Not Remedy of Every Problem'

"We are not experts in everything," apex court said and asked petitioner who claimed to be a political worker to raise such matters on political platforms.

"Supreme Court har cheez ki dawa nahi hai. Sarkar ko chalana court ka kaam nahi hai ( Supreme Court is not a remedy for everything. It is not Court's job to run government)," Justice Kant said. 

A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Ujjal Bhuyan declined to entertain plea, vising petitioner to approach appropriate forum. 

Justice Kant furr clarified that court's role is to dress legal matters and urged petitioner to raise ir concerns in proper forum.

How Did Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose Die?

controversy over death of Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose ('Netaji' for short), surfaced after announcement from Tokyo on August 23, 1945 that Netaji h died in a plane crash on August 18, 1945. However, some press reports published from Tokyo and Taihoku (Taipei) h given contrictory versions. 

After Independence of India, re was a popular demand for an inquiry into alleged disappearance/death of Netaji. issue was also raised in Parliament from time to time. 

Justice Mukherjee Commission of Inquiry which was set up in 1999 came to a conclusion that Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose was not killed in plane crash.

(Justice Mukherjee Commission of Inquiry Report, Page 123/ Source-MHA)

commission completely rejected ‘plane crash death’ premise while noting that re is not one positive evidence to suggest same.