ADVERTISEMENTREMOVE AD

Govt Should Not Withdraw Cases Against MP, MLA Without Approval from HC: SC

The SC emphasised that it is not wrong to withdraw cases of malicious prosecution, but HCs must examine such cases.

Published
Breaking News
2 min read
story-hero-img
i
Aa
Aa
Small
Aa
Medium
Aa
Large
Hindi Female

The Supreme Court on Wednesday, 25 August, observed that a government should take approval of the respective high court before withdrawing criminal cases filed against MPs and MLAs.

The top court emphasised that there is nothing wrong in withdrawing cases of malicious prosecution, but the high court must examine such cases.

A bench headed by Chief Justice NV Ramana said: "We are not against the withdrawal of cases if there is a malicious prosecution. But this needs to be examined by the judicial officer in the high court. If the high court agrees then the cases can be withdrawn."

ADVERTISEMENTREMOVE AD

Senior advocate Vijay Hansaria, appointed amicus curiae in a 2016 petition filed by advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay seeking direction to fast-tracking of criminal trials against sitting and former MPs and MLAs, filed a report in the top court. He was assisted by advocate Sneha Kalita in the matter.

The report said that the state government informed the amicus that 510 cases relating to Muzaffarnagar riots of 2013 were registered in five districts of Meerut zone against 6,869 accused. Out of these, in 175 cases, the charge sheet was filed, in 165 cases, final reports were submitted, and 170 cases were expunged.

"Thereafter, 77 cases were withdrawn by the state government under Section 321 of CrPC. The government orders do not give any reasons for withdrawal of the case under Section 321 of CrPC," the report said.

"It merely states that the administration, after full consideration, has taken a decision to withdraw the particular case," said the report.

The amicus submitted that the 77 cases may be examined by the high court by exercising revisional jurisdiction under Section 401 of CrPC, in the light of the law laid down by the top court in the case of State of Kerala vs K Ajith 2021.

On wednesday, Hansaria contended that each case may have reasoned order. The bench also comprising justices D.Y. Chandrachud and Surya Kant said it cannot examine all the cases, and let them go to the high court.

0
Hansaria submitted that the high court may be directed to issue administrative instructions to expedite the trial of pending cases on a day-to-day basis in terms of Section 309 CrPC.

During the hearing, the chief justice drew a parallel between the problems faced by the judiciary and probe agencies, like CBI or ED. He said, "Just like us, probe agencies are suffering from lack of manpower and infrastructure. We don't want to say anything about these agencies because we don't want to demoralise them; they are overburdened. Same with judges."

(At The Quint, we are answerable only to our audience. Play an active role in shaping our journalism by becoming a member. Because the truth is worth it.)

Read Latest News and Breaking News at The Quint, browse for more from news and breaking-news

Topics:   Supreme Court   High Court 

Speaking truth to power requires allies like you.
Become a Member
3 months
12 months
12 months
Check Member Benefits
Read More
×
×