Speedy Disposal of Cases against Lawmakers

What’s in today’s article?

• What’s in today’s article?
• Why in news?
• What is Representation of the People Act, 1951?
• What are the provisions that deal with disqualification under the RPA 1951?
• Cases against lawmakers: Statistics
• Background of the case
• News Summary: Speedy disposal of cases against lawmakers
• Judgement by the Supreme Court

Why in news?

• The Supreme Court has issued guidelines to monitor the speedy disposal of criminal cases against Members of Parliament (MPs) and Members of Legislative Assemblies (MLAs).
• Among the guidelines issued to high courts across the country, the court called for:
  • the setting up of a special bench to monitor criminal cases against legislators as well as;
  • suo motu registration of such cases by HCs.

Representation of the People Act, 1951

• RP Act 1951 was enacted before first general elections. The act provides for the actual conduct of elections in India.
• It deals with the following aspects of the election:
  • Actual conduct of elections;
  • Administrative machinery for conducting elections;
  • Poll;
  • Election offences;
  • Election disputes;
  • By-elections;
  • Registration of political parties.

Provisions that deal with disqualification under the RPA

• There are several provisions that deal with disqualification under the RPA.
  • Section 8 of the RPA deals with disqualification for conviction of offences.
    • Section 8(1A) of the act includes specific offences such as promoting enmity between two groups, bribery, and undue influence or personation at an election.
    • Section 8(2A) lists offences that deal with hoarding or profiteering, adulteration of food or drugs and for conviction and sentence of at least six months for an offence under any provisions of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
    • Section 8(3A ) disqualifies a convicted person who has been sentenced to imprisonment for not less than two years.
      • He is disqualified from the date of such conviction and shall continue to be disqualified for a further period of six years since his release.
    • Section 9 deals with disqualification for dismissal for corruption or disloyalty, and for entering into government contracts while being a lawmaker.
      • Section 9(A): Disqualification for Government contracts, etc.
    • Section 10: Disqualification for office under Government company.
      • Section 10(A). Disqualification for failure to lodge account of election expenses.
    • Section 11: Removal or reduction of period of disqualification.
      • Section 11(A): Disqualification arising out of conviction and corrupt practices.
      • Section 11(B): Removal of disqualifications.

Cases against lawmakers: Statistics

• Trials are pending in 5,175 cases across the country in which MLAs and MPs are accused.
• Of them, trial in 2,116 cases, which accounts for around 40%, has been pending for over five years, and most of these cases are from Uttar Pradesh (1,377), Bihar (546), and Maharashtra (482).
• As per on report, 40% of sitting MPs have declared criminal cases against them, with 25% of legislators being accused of serious crimes including murder, attempt to murder, kidnapping, and crimes against women.

Background of the case

• The plea was filed by advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay in August 2016.
• It sought speedy disposal of cases involving lawmakers.
• It also sought a lifetime ban on convicted politicians, including sitting legislators, from contesting elections rather than subjecting them to the six-year ban, as laid down under Section 8(3) of the Representation of People Act, 1951.
  • Essentially, this section imposes a six-year ban on persons convicted of offences with a minimum two-year sentence.

News Summary: Speedy disposal of cases against lawmakers

• The Supreme Court has directed chief justices of high courts to constitute special benches to monitor and ensure the speedy disposal of criminal cases pending against MLAs and MPs.

Judgement by the Supreme Court

• Guidelines for monitoring the early disposal of pending cases against lawmakers
  • Among these was the registration of suo motu cases by the chief justices of various high courts across the country to monitor the quick disposal of pending criminal cases against legislators.
  • Such cases can be heard by a CJ-led special bench or a bench designated by her/him.
  • Such cases can also be listed at regular intervals, if necessary.
  • The special bench may also call upon the advocate general or prosecutor to assist the court.
  • Priority shall be given to cases against lawmakers that are punishable with death or life imprisonment.
  • Besides this, cases punishable with 5 years imprisonment or more will also be prioritised.
• High Courts to devise measures to effectively monitor such cases
  • The apex court said that it would be difficult to lay down uniform guidelines for trial courts across the country to dispose of such cases.
  • Hence, the SC left it to the high court to devise measures to effectively monitor such cases.
• Other roles of High Courts
  • The court also ruled that HCs can issue similar orders and directions for effective disposal of such cases.
  • The HCs can also call upon the Principal District and Sessions Judge to take on the responsibility of allocating “subject cases” to such courts.
• On the issue of replacing the 6-year ban with a lifetime by making change in Section 8(3) of RP Act
  • The court kept open this issue.

Q1) What is section 8 of the RPA 1951?

Section 8 of the Representation of the People Act (RPA), 1951 deals with disqualification for conviction of certain offences. 

Q2) What is the difference between the RPA, 1950 and the RPA, 1951?

The key difference between the RPA, 1950 and the RPA, 1951 is that while RPA, 1950 provides for preparations before the actual elections, RPA, 1951 makes provisions for the actual conduct of elections.

Source: Speedy disposal of cases against lawmakers: What SC guidelines on the matter say | The Wire | The Hindu | Indian Express