The Supreme Court Thursday said it cannot lose sight of the fact that a plea was seeking to inflict a lifetime ban on politicians convicted in the criminal case, besides setting up of special courts to expeditiously try criminal cases involving elected representatives.
“We should not lose sight of the fact that the main prayer in the PIL is to impose the lifetime ban on convicted elected representative,” the bench said, adding that the government servants and judicial officers cannot come back after their convictions.
A bench comprising Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi and justices UU Lalit and KM Joseph said that it may take up the aspect of imposing life ban of convicted elected representatives on December 4.
On a PIL filed by advocate Ashwini Upadhyay, the SC’s attempt till date was to fast-track pending criminal cases against politicians. MPs and MLAs and this resulted in the Centre funding the establishment of 12 special courts to exclusively take up such cases on a day-to-day basis. The court has also appointed senior advocate Vijay Hansaria as amicus to assist the court.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre, said that the government has no objection in setting up of special courts for exclusively trying the criminal cases involving elected representatives.
The apex court was earlier informed that 12 special courts set up to try lawmakers exclusively have not been constituted on a uniform pattern, and their number needs to be raised to 19 for trying cases at the sessions level. It was also suggested to the apex court that another 51 such courts are required for magisterial trial cases.
Hansaria said 12 special courts were woefully inadequate to try more than 3,000 cases pending against politicians, some since 2007, and that there should be at least 70 more magisterial and sessions courts to fast-track trials.