Early disposal of criminal cases against MPs and MLAs: HC notice to Centre, Punjab, Haryana on fresh SC directions

On November 9, the Supreme Court had issued a slew of directions and directed the chief justices to take steps for early disposal of cases against MPs and MLAs, observing that either they hear the cases themselves or constitute special benches and hold hearings regularly

Chandigarh The Punjab and Haryana high court on Tuesday sought response from governments of Punjab and Haryana and the Centre on fresh directions issued by the apex court for early disposal of cases against MPs and MLAs. The high court bench of justice GS Sandhawalia and justice Lapita Banerji directed the governments to file a response by February 9.

According to the SC order, there are 91 cases pending in Punjab courts, of which 16 were pending for over five years involving MPs and MLAs (iStock)

On November 9, the Supreme Court had issued a slew of directions and directed the chief justices to take steps for early disposal of cases against MPs and MLAs, observing that either they hear the cases themselves or constitute special benches and hold hearings regularly.

The apex court had directed the high courts to create a platform on their websites for monitoring of these cases. It was also directed that district and sessions judges of the trial courts concerned should ensure sufficient infrastructure for the designated courts for effective functioning and early disposal of such cases.

According to the SC order, there are 91 cases pending in Punjab courts, of which 16 were pending for over five years involving MPs and MLAs. In case of Haryana, 48 cases were pending in trial courts, with 18 of them pending for more than five years.

In Chandigarh, only one case was pending for more than five years and 10 cases were ongoing in its courts involving MPs and MLAs.

The Punjab and Haryana high court had earlier initiated suo motu proceedings in 2021, under which it is monitoring probes into FIRs registered against MPs and MLAs in the two states and the UT. This suo motu case was also initiated following SC directions.

What the top court said

The designated trial courts shall give priority to criminal cases punishable with death or life imprisonment, and then to the cases punishable with imprisonment for five years or more. They would then hear the cases not in these categories.

The trial courts shall not adjourn the cases, except for rare and compelling reasons.

The chief justice may order listing of cases, pending in high court, in which orders of stay of trial have been passed. These may be taken up by the special designated bench to ensure appropriate orders, including vacation of stay orders so that trials could commence at the earliest

The high court may require the district and sessions judge to bear the responsibility of allocating the subject cases to such court, considered appropriate and effective.

HC may seek reports at regular intervals from district and sessions