The Supreme Court on Monday set a one-year deadline for lower courts to complete trial against MPs and MlAs facing serious criminal charges. The one-year period will be counted from the date of framing of charges.
The Supreme Court (SC) held that if for some reasons the trial was not completed within one year, the trial judge should submit a report to the Chief Justice of the related High Court explaining the reasons. The Chief Justice will then pass the necessary order and direction.
The order, by a bench of Justices RM lodha and Kurian Joseph came on a PIl filed by NGO Public Interest Foundation seeking steps to curb criminalization of politics. The petition urged the SC to consider debarring MPs/MlAs either at the stage of conviction or framing of charge pertaining to any serious crime punishable with over five years of sentence.
The Representation of Peoples Act 1951 already lists the offences, conviction in which would lead to disqualification for a period of six years after completion of the sentence. The offences include acts of terrorism, corruption cases under Prevention of Corruption Act, possession or sale of drugs, violation under Foreign Exchange (Regulation) Act, preaching and practice of untouchability, violation of Customs Act, IPC offences Sections 153A (promoting enmity on ground of religion, race, caste, residence, etc), 171E (bribery), 171F (undue influence at an election), 376 (rape), 498A (dowry harassment), or any offence punishable with imprisonment of two years or above, which includes murder, kidnapping, extortion, etc.
Fixing the one-year deadline for high-profile criminal trials, the bench observed: “In all such cases, the concerned court where sitting MPs/MlAs are being tried may be conducted on a day-to-day basis.” The PIl emphasised that due to power and influence wielded by legislators, trials got delayed, nullifying the effect of disqualification during their tenure.
The law Commission in its latest report also discussed the need for disqualifying tainted MPs and MlAs. It was of the view that if the trial did not conclude within a year, the tainted MP/MlA would stand automatically disqualified. In the alternate, it proposed that the rights, remuneration and perks attached to the member’s office can be suspended.
The court decided to examine the recommendation of the commission along with its suggestion to debar MPs/MlAs at the stage when charges get framed against them in a court. The bench felt that the issue required deeper consideration as it bordered on the thin line of separation of powers between legislature and judiciary. The commission further recommended enhancement of punishment to two years in prison for filing false affidavits, which the court decided to take up after six weeks.
The court sought the view of the Centre before passing the order. ASG Paras Kuhad informed the court that on principle, the Centre did not object to expeditious trial of cases, but there would be instances where the trial gets long-drawn due to voluminous evidence. For that, the court allowed the trial judge to tell the HC Chief Justice of the same. “By this there will be some control and supervision over trial,” the court said, adding, “The sword will not be kept hanging on his (MP/MlA) head forever.”