HC panel questions setting up Special Courts to try MPs, MLAs

A 3-judge committee of the Madras High Court has questioned the constitutional validity of setting up Special Courts to solely try MPs and MLAs for varied crimes.

It mentioned the Special Courts ought to be “offence-centric” and never “offender-centric.”

“An MP/MLA, who commits an offence under the POCSO Act [or other Special Acts like Prevention of Corruption Act, Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act] can only be tried by a Special Court created under the POCSO Act [PC Act, NDPS Act] and there cannot be another Special Court exclusively for trial of an MP/MLA, who commits POCSO offence,” the Madras High Court Committee report reasoned.

Status report

This report is a part of a standing report filed by amicus curiae Vijay Hansaria and advocate Sneha Kalita within the Supreme Court on Monday.

The HC Committee report, dated October 13, comes within the face of a 2017 Supreme Court order authorising the Centre to set up 12 Special Courts to solely try felony politicians throughout the nation.

It additionally comes at a time when a three-judge Bench of the apex court docket led by Justice N.V. Ramana is methods to expedite these trials pending for years, in some instances, for many years. Over 4,400 felony trials are pending in opposition to legislators. Of this over 2500 trials contain sitting legislators.

But the Madras High Court’s Criminal Rules Committee on Special Courts for Trial of Criminal Cases in opposition to MPs/MLAs, composed of Justices P.N. Prakash, G. Jayachandran and N. Sathish Kumar, mentioned Special Courts couldn’t be set up on the idea of judicial or govt orders.

“Special Courts can only be constituted by a statute and not by executive or judicial fiats,” Mr. Hansaria summarised the observations of the Committee.

Robust construction

The committee raised sturdy reservations in opposition to setting up Special Courts in Tamil Nadu.

“The existing court structure in Tamil Nadu, which is robust, is more than enough to deal with the cases involving MPs and MLAs,” the committee mentioned.

It urged the Madras High Court Chief Justice to convey this “fact” to the discover of the Supreme Court to get an “exemption from establishing Special Courts for trial of cases involving MPs and MLAs.”

The committee, Mr. Hansaria summarised, additionally referred to how instances have been filed and withdrawn in Tamil Nadu when energy modified arms within the State.

“The two principal political parties viz., DMK and AIADMK, whenever they come to power, file defamation cases against opposition leaders in the court of sessions. These cases will invariably be stayed by the High Court. When there is change in government, all the cases filed by the previous government will be withdrawn,” it famous.

The committee pointed to how witnesses, most likely in Kanyakumari, have to journey 700 km to Chennai to testify on the Special Court there.

“None thought about their safety,” the committee identified.

It questioned how one Special Court might cowl the instances throughout 32 districts of Tamil Nadu.