'Proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt Not Needed To Prove Defection, Speaker's Decision Perverse': Calcutta High Court Disqualifies MLA Mukul Roy

The Calcutta High Court has held that proof beyond reasonable doubt is not the standard for establishing defection under the tenth schedule of the Indian Constitution. The Court clarified that such proceedings are civil in nature and therefore governed by the test of preponderance of probabilities.

A Division Bench of Justice Debangsu Basak and Justice Md. Shabbar Rashidi set aside the order of the Speaker of the West Bengal Legislative Assembly, which had refused to disqualify Krishnanagar Uttar MLA Mukul Roy. The Bench described the Speaker's order as “perverse”, observing that 'no reasonable person could have arrived at the conclusion returned by the Speaker' on the materials before him.

“The finding returned by the Speaker is perverse and cannot be sustained...No reasonable person could have arrived at the conclusion returned by the Speaker on the basis of the materials before him,” the court said.

The Court observed that neither the Tenth Schedule nor the West Bengal Legislative Assembly (Disqualification on Ground of Defection) Rules, 1986, creates any criminal liability. Consequently, the Speaker erred in treating the proceedings as “quasi-criminal” and requiring proof “beyond a reasonable doubt”.

“The Speaker, while exercising powers under the Tenth Schedule, acts as a quasi-judicial authority. He is expected to act fairly and in accordance with law...the impugned order demonstrates a failure to adhere to such standards of fairness and legality,” the court said.

The Bench underscored that the correct approach was to assess the case on the preponderance of probabilities, as in any civil or quasi-judicial inquiry.

Finding that the material allegations of defection remained uncontroverted, the Court held that the Speaker misdirected his enquiry by applying a wrong standard of proof and ignored the unrefuted evidence on record. It further observed that the Speaker, acting under the Tenth Schedule, functions as a quasi-judicial authority and is therefore bound to act fairly and in accordance with judicial principles.

“Material allegations made in the disqualification petition remained uncontroverted...the Speaker failed to appreciate that the respondent no. 2 did not deny the allegations of defection and had, in fact, admitted to attending the press conference of the All India Trinamool Congress,” the court said.

Holding the Speaker's findings unsustainable, the Bench concluded that Mukul Roy voluntarily gave up membership of the Bharatiya Janata Party and thereby stood disqualified under paragraph 2(1)(a) of the Tenth Schedule with effect from June 11, 2021.

His appointment as Chairman of the Public Accounts Committee was consequently set aside.

Rejecting the State's plea to remit the matter for reconsideration, the Court ruled that a fresh remand would be an exercise in futility, and allowed the disqualification petition filed by Leader of the Opposition Suvendu Adhikari.

Case: Suvendu Adhikari Vs. Hon'ble Speaker, West Bengal Legislative Assembly & Ors

Case No: WPA No. 6193 of 2023

Click here to read order