New Delhi: Ineffective monitoring by High Courts to ensure compliance of Supreme Court directions, lack of exclusive courts to hear cases against sitting and former lawmakers, regular absence of accused on dates fixed by courts, non-service of court notices to witnesses in time, prosecution not taking effective measures to secure witnesses’ presence and trial court’s liberal approach in granting adjournments. Senior advocate Vijay Hansaria’s 22nd report has identified the above mentioned reasons, among others, for tardy progress in trial of criminal cases pending against sitting and former MPs and MLAs.
Hansaria is assisting the Supreme Court as an amicus curiae (friend of the court) in a 2016 petition seeking expeditious trial of criminal cases against MPs and MLAs.
The first direction came in 2017, when the Supreme Court directed creation of 12 fast-track courts across the country. A year later, it directed that designated sessions and magistrate courts be set up in every district to prioritise criminal cases against MPs/MLAs.
These directions came in the backdrop of the top court, through its rulings, expressing concern over the nexus between crime and politics. Hansaria’s latest report, prepared after collecting data from all High Courts—barring Allahabad, which did not submit its data—paints a grim picture about pending criminal trials against lawmakers.
According to the senior advocate, there is hardly any change in the status of the cases due to the reasons he has highlighted.
His report shows that 4,192 cases (including Allahabad HC data taken from the official website) are still pending against sitting/former MPs and MLAs, despite the top court’s repeated directions to conclude the trials. In December 2018, this number stood at 4,075.
Of the 4,192 cases, 519 have been pending for more than 10 years; 754 for 5-10 years; 562 for 3-5 years; and 1,095 for less than 3 years. While there are 335 cases against sitting MPs, 1,222 are pending against sitting MLAs. Further, the data revealed that there are 269 cases pending against former MPs and 1,339 against former MLAs.
Besides, Hansaria’s report shows, 700 cases were pending investigation, where a chargesheet has not been filed. Around 360 cases have been under investigation for more than three years, 250 have been under investigation between one to three years and 100 have been under investigation for less than a year.
Hansaria also complained about the mismatch between the data provided to him by the High Courts and the official figures on the respective websites.
According to his research, data uploaded on different High Court portals adds up to show 4,442 cases are pending against sitting and former MPs/MLAs.
Amongst the several directions issued by the top court, High Courts were in 2023 asked to constitute special benches to monitor the trials. These directions also required prioritising cases punishable with death or life imprisonment, followed by offences punishable with five years or more; discouraged adjournments; and required monitoring of stays.
Hansaria’s report stated that there is no uniform practice for the High Courts to monitor cases. For instance, Allahabad HC is monitoring only 20-year-old cases, with several disposed of. The Delhi HC listed the case to monitor the trial repeatedly, but adjourned it without seeking any details about the status. Similarly, in Gauhati HC cases dating back decades were found pending at stages such as appearance and recording of evidence.
Matters in J&K HC have been repeatedly adjourned and in Patna HC long dates have been given in the case.
Rajasthan HC, meanwhile, had issued orders for day-to-day trials and time-bound disposal of older cases.
To reiterate his earlier argument that trials against MPs/MLAs require speedy disposal, Hansaria quoted the latest report of Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) on the criminal antecedents of sitting MPs and MLAs. At present out of 543 Lok Sabha MPs, 251 (46 percent) have criminal cases, of which 170 (31 percent) have serious criminal cases, involving offences punishable with five years or more. Seventy-five of 233 Rajya Sabha MPs have criminal cases including 40 facing serious criminal cases.
For state Legislative Assemblies, the report records 2,098 MLAs with criminal cases out of 4,111, including 1,286 with serious criminal cases.
Hansaria maintained criminal proceedings involving lawmakers should conclude expeditiously, within a fixed time frame and sought directions from the top court to strengthen the system.
He urged the Supreme Court to monitor the progress on a regular basis and suggested a one-year deadline for conclusion of trials, from the framing of charge. Additionally, cases pending for more than three years should be conducted on a day-to-day basis and if an accused does not appear on two consecutive dates, non-bailable warrants should be issued.
To secure the presence of witnesses a nodal prosecution officer should be appointed for it, he suggested.
(Edited by Amrtansh Arora)
Also Read: Who is India’s richest CM & who’s facing the most number of criminal cases? An ADR tell-all