New Delhi: With nearly 5,000 cases pending against sitting and former members of Parliament and members of legislative assemblies, the Supreme Court has been urged to issue directions to ensure expeditious disposal of cases against the lawmakers.
The latest affidavit filed by senior advocate Vijay Hansaria, who has been appointed amicus curiae by the apex court in a PIL seeking expeditious disposal of criminal cases against MPs/MLAs, said that legislators have great influence on the investigation and/or trial of cases against them, and trials are not allowed to be concluded.
“It is submitted that despite orders by this court from time to time and monitoring by the high court, a large number of cases are pending against the MPs and MLAs, which is a scar on the democratic setup of our country.
“The pendency of a large number of cases, some of them for decades, shows that the legislators have great influence on the investigation and/or trial of cases against them, and the trial is not allowed to be concluded,” Hansaria’s affidavit said.
A bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Manmohan will take up the PIL filed by Ashwini Upadhyay in 2016 seeking life ban of convicted politicians for hearing on Monday.
Hansari, in his affidavit filed through advocate Senha Kalita, said a total of 4,732 criminal cases are pending against the lawmakers, including 892 cases registered in 2024 as of January 1, 2025.
Referring to a report by the Association of Democratic Reforms (ADR), a poll rights body, Hansari said that out of the 543 members in the present Lok Sabha, 251 have criminal cases against them, of which 170 are serious criminal cases (punishable with five years of imprisonment or more).
Flagging various reasons for the delay in the trial of cases, Hansaria said the special court for MPs/MLAs undertakes regular court work and the trial against MPs/MLAs is only one of the many assignments of these courts, except in a few states.
He said in some cases, the accused are not appearing before the court on the date fixed and the process is not served on the witnesses in time for recording of evidence.
Among other reasons, he said prosecution has not taken effective and serious steps for the presence of the witnesses in the court on the specified dates and the trial courts have been liberal in granting adjournments despite the direction of this court that “the trial court shall not adjourn cases except for rare and compelling reasons”.
The affidavit said, “It is submitted that the orders passed by various high courts in the suo motu writ petition shows that there is no substantial progress in the trial of cases. It is thus necessary that this court may pass further directions to ensure expeditious disposal of cases against MPs/MLAs.”
Hansaria further submitted that the right to information being a part of freedom of speech and expression guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution includes the right of the citizens to know the progress of the trial of cases against lawmakers.
“Such information can be gathered only if there is a prominent tab on the website of the high court furnishing all the information. This court has repeatedly held that the voters are entitled to know about the criminal antecedents of the lawmakers, which would include the progress of the trial and the reasons for delay,” Hansaria said.
“It is submitted that the particulars are not easily accessible on the website of the high court. There is no uniformity of the website and the citizens are not able to view the details of the pending cases. Further, in none of the websites, the orders of the special MP/MLA court are uploaded,” he added.
He sought direction from the court that the special MP/MLA courts will exclusively conduct trials against MPs/MLAs; and only when the trial of these cases are concluded, other cases would be taken up.
“The principal district and session judges of all the districts will allocate regular court work to the special MP/ MLA court only when the trial of cases against MPs/MLAs are concluded,” he submitted.
He also sought direction that the special MP/MLA courts shall conduct trial of all cases pending for more than three years on a day-to-day basis in terms of Section 346 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (Section 309 of CrPC).
Hansaria further sought issuance of non-bailable warrants for arrest in all cases, where the accused has not appeared for two consecutive hearings.
Hansaria also sought direction for quashing of the cases (863 in different states) registered against the lawmakers for violating prohibitory orders, if pending for more than one year.
On April 22 last year, Hansaria told the top court that the special courts for trial of criminal cases related to MPs and MLAs decided more than 2,000 cases in 2023, the Supreme Court was informed.
On November 9, 2023, in a significant verdict aimed at fast-tracking trials in more than 5,000 criminal cases against lawmakers, the top court directed the high courts to set up a special bench to monitor cases for their speedy disposal.
It also asked the special courts not to adjourn proceedings in such matters except “for rare and compelling reasons”.
Issuing a slew of directions to the high courts, district judges, and special courts designated to hear matters related to lawmakers, the top court had directed that criminal cases against members of Parliament, legislative assemblies and legislative councils be given priority.
