HC seeks latest trial status of cases against ex, sitting legislators

Srinagar, Oct 30: The High Court of J&K and Ladakh has sought the latest status report about the trial of criminal cases pending against sitting or ex-parliamentarians facing trial in various courts in J&K.

A division bench of Chief Justice Tashi Rabstan and Justice M A Chowdhary sought the status of the trial against the legislators while hearing on its own motion a Public Interest Litigation (PIL).

The High Court registered the PIL suo moto in 2021 in view of directions contained in the order dated September 16, 2020, of the Supreme Court passed in Writ Petition (Civil) No 699/2016 directing for monitoring the progress of the trial of cases pending against the sitting and former legislators -MPs or MLAs.

“Needful in terms of order dated September 9, 2024, has not been done,” the bench said in its order. In terms of the order of September 9 this year, the court had sought the latest status report after noting that the last status report had been filed in 2022.

The directions came following the submission by Government Advocate Faheem Nissar Shah for more time to file the report. The Court granted the counsel four weeks to file the latest status report, posting the plea for further hearing on December 23.

After the High Court Registry registered the PIL as “Court on its own motion versus Union of India and others” in 2021, it arrayed the Union of India as a party through its Home Secretary, Union Territory of J&K through its Commissioner Secretary, Home and Union Territory of Ladakh through its Commissioner Secretary, Home.

Earlier in 2022, the Jammu and Kashmir government had informed the High Court of J&K and Ladakh that 13 former members of the Legislative Assembly and sitting or ex-parliamentarians were facing trial in the courts of J&K.

Notably, on September 16, 2020, the Supreme Court while hearing a petition filed by Ashwani Kumar Upadhaya observed that one of the main objectives behind issuing notice in the Petition, and the various orders passed from time to time on it was to ensure that criminal prosecutions against elected representatives (MPs and MLAs) were concluded expeditiously.

The top court was of the opinion that such special consideration was required not only because of the rising wave of criminalisation that was occurring in the politics in the country, but also due to the power that elected representatives (sitting or former) wield, to influence or hamper effective prosecution.

While the apex court observed that as legislators are the repositories of the faith and trust of their electorate, there is a necessity to be aware of the antecedents of the person who is or was elected. “Ensuring the purity of democratically elected institutions is thus the hallmark of the present proceedings,” it said.