DB seeks details of trial pending against MPs, MLAs in Courts

22/09/2021

JAMMU, Sep 21: A Division Bench of Jammu & Kashmir High Court Comprising Chief Justice Pankaj Mithal and Justice in a Suo-Moto Public Interest Litigation, directed Advocate General and ASGI to file number of trials which are pending in different subordinate courts as well as the matters pending in the High Court against the said MPs or MLAs.
This significant order has been passed by Division Bench in view of directions contained in the order dated 16.09.2020 of the Supreme Court passed in writ petition (Civil) No.699/2016 directing for monitoring the progress of the trial of cases pending against the sitting/ former legislators (MPs or MLAs), on the directions of Chief Justice, the Registry has registered this PIL as "Court on its own motion versus Union of India and others". In this SUO moto motion, the "Union of India" shall be represented through Home Secretary, "Union Territory of J&K" through Commissioner Secretary, Home and "Union Territory of Ladakh" through Commissioner Secretary, Home.
DB arrayed them as respondent and notice of this motion may be given to Mr. T.M. Shamsi, ASGI who represents not only Union of India but Union Territory of Ladakh as well and Mr. D.C. Raina, Advocate General to Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir.
DB further directed both to inform the court on next date as to the number of trials which are pending in different subordinate courts as well as the matters pending in the High Court against the said MPs or MLAs.
It is worthwhile to mention here that On September 16, 2020, Supreme Court while hearing a petition filed by Ashwani Kumar Upadhaya observed that one of the main objectives behind issuing notice in the present Writ Petition, and the various orders that have been passed time to time by this Court, was to ensure that criminal prosecutions against elected representatives (MPs and MLAs) are concluded expeditiously. The Court was of the opinion that such special consideration was required not only because of the rising wave of criminalization that was occurring in the politics in the country, but also due to the power that elected representatives (sitting or former) wield, to influence or hamper effective prosecution. Additionally, as legislators are the repositories of the faith and trust of their electorate, there is a necessity to be aware of the antecedents of the person that is/was elected. Ensuring the purity of democratically elected institutions is thus the hallmark of the present proceedings.
However, despite all the initiatives taken by this Court in the present petition, there has been no substantial improvement in the situation when it comes to the disposal of pending criminal cases against sitting/former legislators (MPs and MLAs). Now, that we are well equipped with the information and data collected from the various High Courts, and looking at the suggestions made by the learned amicus, the learned Solicitor General and other learned counsel, we are better placed to assess the existing situation.
With respect to increasing the number of Special Courts and rationalizing the pending criminal cases, we deem it appropriate that, before passing any specific direction in respect thereto, it would be appropriate to direct the Chief Justice of each High Court to formulate and submit an action plan for rationalization of the number of Special Courts necessary, with respect to the following aspects Total number of pending cases in each district, Required number of proportionate Special Courts, Number of Courts that are currently available, Number of Judges and the subject categories of the cases, Tenure of the Judges to be designated, Number of cases to be assigned to each Judge, Expected time for disposal of the cases, Distance of the Courts to be designated and Adequacy of infrastructure.
SC further ordered that the Chief Justices while preparing the action plan should also consider, in the event the trials are already ongoing in an expeditious manner, whether transferring the same to a different Court would be necessary and appropriate and they shall also designate a Special Bench, comprising themselves and their designate, in order to monitor the progress of these trials.
SC further said that the Chief Justices are also requested to give their comments on the other suggestions of the amicus, as extracted by us in our order dated 10.09.2020 and this order. They are also requested to send us additional suggestions, if any, for the purpose of expedient disposal of pending criminal cases against legislators. The action plan, with the comments and suggestions of the learned Chief Justices of the High Courts, are to be sent to the Secretary General of this Court, preferably within a week.
SC asked Chief Justices of all the High Courts to list forthwith all pending criminal cases involving sitting/former legislators (MPs and MLAs), particularly those wherein a stay has been granted, before an appropriate bench(es) comprising of the learned Chief Justice and/or their designates. Upon being listed, the Court must first decide whether the stay granted, if any, should continue, keeping in view the principles regarding the grant of stay enshrined in the judgment of this Court in Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency Private Limited v. CBI, (. In the event that a stay is considered necessary, the Court should hear the matter on a day-to-day basis and dispose of the same expeditiously, preferably within a period of two month, without any unnecessary adjournment. It goes without saying that the Covid-19 condition should not be an impediment to the compliance of this direction, as these matters could be conveniently heard through video conferencing.
SC further ordered that the Registrar Generals of all the High Courts are directed to place a copy of this order and our earlier order dated 10.09.2020 before the Chief Justices of their respective High Courts forthwith, for necessary directions.

Photo Gallery

BSE Sensex

NSE Nifty