By PTI
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Monday asked all the high courts to furnish the details of criminal cases pending for over five years against MPs and MLAs and steps taken for their speedy disposal.
A bench of Justices DY Chandrachud and Hima Kohli also modified its August 10, 2021 order by which it had said judicial officers, who are holding trial of cases against law makers, should not be changed without prior permission of the court.
The top court took note of the submission of amicus curiae senior advocate Vijay Hansaria that a lot of applications are being filed by judicial officers seeking permission to be relieved of the charge of the special court, as they have been promoted or transferred.
The bench modified the order dated August 10, 2021 and said the chief justice of a high court will be at liberty to order transfer of such judicial officers.
“All the High Courts shall file an affidavit indicating the number of criminal cases pending against MP/MLAs for more than five years and steps taken for their speedy disposal. The affidavits shall be filed within four weeks,” the court said.
The bench was hearing a 2016 PIL filed by advocate Ashwini Upadhyay which, besides seeking a life ban on politicians from contesting elections upon conviction in criminal cases, sought expeditious trial of accused lawmakers and setting up of special courts for the purpose across the country.
Hansaria, assisted by advocate Sneha Kalita, said special courts are needed for speedy disposal of criminal cases against law makers as the number of cases against them are on the rise despite several directions of the court.
The bench asked Hansaria to file a note as to what directions he wants to be passed and it would consider issuing certain directions on the next date.
In August, the top court had agreed to consider the PIL which sought a lifetime disqualification of an elected representative following conviction in a criminal case.
It had taken note of the submission that there existed a “glaring disparity” in the law concerning disqualification of lawmakers after their conviction in criminal cases under the Representation of the People Act compared to other citizens who are employed in government services.
The top court has been passing a slew of directions from time-to-time on the plea filed by Upadhyay for ensuring expeditious trial of cases against lawmakers and speedy investigation by the CBI and other agencies.
On August 10 last year, the top court had curtailed the power of the state prosecutors and ruled that they cannot withdraw prosecution against lawmakers under the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) without the prior sanction of the high courts.
It had expressed strong displeasure over the non-filing of requisite status reports by the Centre and its agencies like the CBI, and indicated it would set up a special bench in the top court to monitor criminal cases against politicians.
The apex court order had come after Hansaria pointed out that states like Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Maharashtra and Karnataka have sought to withdraw criminal cases against politicians by using section 321 of the CrPC which empowers prosecutors to withdraw cases.
The top court had directed that no prosecution against a sitting or former MP or MLA shall be withdrawn without the leave of the high court in the respective suo-motu writ petitions registered in pursuance of its order.
The high courts are requested to examine the withdrawals, whether pending or disposed of since September 16, 2020 in the light of guidelines laid down by this court, it had said.
In another important direction, it ordered that judges of special courts hearing cases against the MPs and MLAs will not be transferred until further orders.
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Monday asked all the high courts to furnish the details of criminal cases pending for over five years against MPs and MLAs and steps taken for their speedy disposal.
A bench of Justices DY Chandrachud and Hima Kohli also modified its August 10, 2021 order by which it had said judicial officers, who are holding trial of cases against law makers, should not be changed without prior permission of the court.
The top court took note of the submission of amicus curiae senior advocate Vijay Hansaria that a lot of applications are being filed by judicial officers seeking permission to be relieved of the charge of the special court, as they have been promoted or transferred.
The bench modified the order dated August 10, 2021 and said the chief justice of a high court will be at liberty to order transfer of such judicial officers.
“All the High Courts shall file an affidavit indicating the number of criminal cases pending against MP/MLAs for more than five years and steps taken for their speedy disposal. The affidavits shall be filed within four weeks,” the court said.
The bench was hearing a 2016 PIL filed by advocate Ashwini Upadhyay which, besides seeking a life ban on politicians from contesting elections upon conviction in criminal cases, sought expeditious trial of accused lawmakers and setting up of special courts for the purpose across the country.
Hansaria, assisted by advocate Sneha Kalita, said special courts are needed for speedy disposal of criminal cases against law makers as the number of cases against them are on the rise despite several directions of the court.
The bench asked Hansaria to file a note as to what directions he wants to be passed and it would consider issuing certain directions on the next date.
In August, the top court had agreed to consider the PIL which sought a lifetime disqualification of an elected representative following conviction in a criminal case.
It had taken note of the submission that there existed a “glaring disparity” in the law concerning disqualification of lawmakers after their conviction in criminal cases under the Representation of the People Act compared to other citizens who are employed in government services.
The top court has been passing a slew of directions from time-to-time on the plea filed by Upadhyay for ensuring expeditious trial of cases against lawmakers and speedy investigation by the CBI and other agencies.
On August 10 last year, the top court had curtailed the power of the state prosecutors and ruled that they cannot withdraw prosecution against lawmakers under the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) without the prior sanction of the high courts.
It had expressed strong displeasure over the non-filing of requisite status reports by the Centre and its agencies like the CBI, and indicated it would set up a special bench in the top court to monitor criminal cases against politicians.
The apex court order had come after Hansaria pointed out that states like Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Maharashtra and Karnataka have sought to withdraw criminal cases against politicians by using section 321 of the CrPC which empowers prosecutors to withdraw cases.
The top court had directed that no prosecution against a sitting or former MP or MLA shall be withdrawn without the leave of the high court in the respective suo-motu writ petitions registered in pursuance of its order.
The high courts are requested to examine the withdrawals, whether pending or disposed of since September 16, 2020 in the light of guidelines laid down by this court, it had said.
In another important direction, it ordered that judges of special courts hearing cases against the MPs and MLAs will not be transferred until further orders.
