The Madhya Pradesh High Court directed the transfer of a false affidavit case against BJP MLA Sumitra Devi Kasdekar to special courts.
The Court held thus in view of the notification issued by the Madhya Pradesh High Court which sets up courts to deal with cases against MPs and MLAs.
The bench of Justice Sanjay Dwivedi after going through Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay versus Union of India and Anr.- Writ Petition (Civil) No. 699/2015 and the notification of the MP High Court observed, “The Notification dated 14.12.2021 very specifically portrays and speaks about the direction issued by the Supreme Court. It sets up the Special Courts to deal with the cases relating to Members of Parliament and Members of Legislative Assembly.” The Petitioner, who is a member of the legislative assembly, approached the High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the order of the lower Court which took cognizance of the complaint made under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C and directed registration of FIR.
It was alleged by the complainant that at the time of submitting her nomination paper, the petitioner gave a false affidavit with incorrect information to the Election Commission, and therefore the complainant made a complaint to the Superintendent of Police. However, when nothing was done by authorities he filed a complaint under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C.
Senior Advocate Manish Datt appeared for the Petitioner and Government Advocate Alok Agnihotri appeared for the Respondent. The Petitioner argued that pursuant to the SC judgment in Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay , the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, issued a notification dated December 12, 2021 particularising and designating the Courts as Special Courts under the scheme to deal with the criminal cases involving political persons for trial of cases registered against the elected Members of Parliament and Members of Legislative Assembly in the State of Madhya Pradesh.
The single bench found it fit to decide the question of jurisdiction and competency first as according to the Court if no jurisdiction was found the impugned order would automatically go.
The Court further observed, “Thus, taking note of the notification issued by the High Court, I have no hesitation to hold that the Court of Burhanpur, which entertained the complaint, is having no jurisdiction as the said court was not designated to deal with the criminal cases involving MPs and MLAs and the said court could not have entertained the complaint filed by the respondent No. 2 under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C.” As per the Court, since the basic ground of competency and jurisdiction of the Court was decided, the other grounds questioning the technicality of registration of FIR raised by the petitioner were not dealt with because if the foundation goes, all the infrastructures based upon the said foundation also goes.
The Court allowed the Petition with a direction to the trial Court to forward the complaint to the competent court.
Cause Title: Sumitra Devi Kasdekar v. The State of Madhya Pradesh
Appearance:
Appellant: Senior Adv. Manish Datt, Eshaan Datt
Respondent: Government Adv. Alok Agnihotri, Adv. Ravindra Kumar Gupta
Click here to read/download Judgment
|