Special websites likely for details of cases pending against 4,859 former, serving lawmakers

Source:-https://www.hindustantimes.com

The Supreme Court is likely to consider a proposal asking all high courts to have special websites for details of cases pending against 4,859 former and serving lawmakers along with the progress in each trial as part of attempts to expedite them.
The suggestion is among recommendations of Vijay Hansaria, the amicus curiae (friend of the Court) assisting the Supreme Court in connection with Bharatiya Janata Party leader Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay’s plea seeking fast-tracking of pending criminal cases lawmakers.

Hansaria submitted a report to the court on Monday analysing the pendency of 4,859 cases at 25 high courts.

The report said the number of cases pending against serving and former members of parliament (MPs) and legislative assemblies (MLAs) has increased over the last two years despite the Supreme Court’s monitoring for expeditious disposal. “It is therefore submitted that strict monitoring at the micro-level, by the High Courts, is necessary to ensure expeditious disposal of the cases against legislators.”

Hansaria considered suggestions from various high courts on possible steps to expedite the trials. He cited Telangana high court’s move of creating a special website to update the pendency and status of the cases and called it useful. “A special website may be created for posting the details of cases pending against MPs and MLAs in various courts, including the case status, as has been done by the Telangana High Court.”
A Justice NV Ramana-led bench will take up Hansaria’s suggestions on Tuesday.

The Supreme Court on September 16 asked high courts to consider framing action plans for disposal of the pending cases within a year.

In an earlier report submitted to the Supreme Court on September 15, Hansaria recommended special courts in each district to exclusively deal with cases against lawmakers. Such courts currently function in Andhra Pradesh, Bihar, Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Telangana, Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal, Delhi, Maharashtra, and Kerala.

Except Tripura and Meghalaya high courts, others have filed their action plans and largely favoured setting up of special courts in each district. Some have proposed these courts at zonal levels. Almost all high courts have also registered suo moto writ petitions (on their own) to monitor the progress of trials pending against lawmakers within their jurisdictions and to give suitable directions.
Uttar Pradesh has the highest number of such pending cases (1374), followed by Bihar (557), Odisha (445), Tamil Nadu (361), and Maharashtra (337). The status of cases pending with the Central Bureau of Investigation, Enforcement Directorate, and other central agencies under the Prevention of Corruption Act, etc, is still awaited. The Supreme Court has directed the Centre to furnish this information.

In his latest report, Hansaria has said some high courts have written to the state governments seeking appointments of police officers as nodal prosecution officers and additional special public prosecutors as part of the Supreme Court’s September 16 directions.

A nodal prosecution officer will be responsible for producing accused and witnesses and ensure execution of summons and non-bailable warrants. In case of any lapse, the officer would be liable for contempt of court apart from disciplinary proceedings, Hansaria said.
Hansaria has also raised the issue of stays granted in the cases related to the lawmakers. The Supreme Court has granted stays in 10 such cases and high courts in 300 without finally deciding the matter. Most high courts informed the top court that special benches have been constituted to dispose of the cases.

Hansaria requested the top court to pass directions for listing the 10 cases. He added this will require appropriate directions from the Chief Justice of India for urgent listing.

In its action plan, the Kerala high court has said the police are reluctant to arrest legislators. It has called this one of the reasons for the pendency of six cases against legislators before vigilance courts and 310 cases before magistrates.
Hansaria has recommended directions to the police superintendents to ensure execution of warrants/summons to accused legislators, failing which they shall be liable for contempt action and disciplinary proceeding.