No Reasons Given By ED, CBI For Delay In Investigating Cases Against MPs/MLAs : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on Wednesday expressed grave concerns at the slow pace of investigation by the Enforcement Directorate and the Central Bureau of Investigation in cases against sitting and former MPs and MLAs.A bench comprising the Chief Justice of India NV Ramana, Justice DY Chandrachud and Justice Surya Kant expressed displeasure at the ED and CBI for not indicating the reasons for not even filing chargesheets in many cases even after 10 years."We are sorry to say that the report is inconclusive and there is no reason for not filing chargesheet for 10-15 years", the CJI said, referring to the reports filed by ED and CBI. As per the report, 51 MPs, 71 MLAs/MLCs are facing cases under PMLA and 121 CBI cases against sitting legislators are pending."51 MPs. including ex-MPs, are accused PMLAs. 28 cases are still under investigation. Cases range from 8 to 10 years. 121 CBI cases are pending. 58 out of them are punishable with death or life imprisonment. The oldest case is from 2010. 37 cases of CBI are still under investigation", the CJI read out the statistics."We don't want to demoralize the agencies. They are over-burdened like judges. So we are exercising restraint. But the report speaks volumes", the CJI commented.The CJI also said that in several PMLA cases, the ED has done nothing except attaching properties. Attaching properties without filing chargesheet will not serve any purpose, the CJI added.The Solicitor General said that in many ED cases, responses from foreign countries are often required. However, Letters Rogatories send for information from foreign countries are responded late. This causes delay in investigation, the SG added. The SG however clarified that he was not justifying the delay. He suggested that the Court may set an outer-limit for trial to end."It is easy for us to say expedite trial and all... but where are the judges?", the CJI asked."Manpower is a real issue. Just like us investigating agencies are also suffering with this issue. Everyone wants a CBI Investigation you see", the CJI commented. When the SG said that the stay orders passed by higher courts stopped the trial, the bench said that the statistics showed that stay orders are there in only 8 cases (7 by High Courts and 1 by Supreme Court).Amicus Curiae Senior Advocate Vijay Hansaria submitted that he has made a suggestion regarding the constitution of a monitoring committee to evaluate the reasons for delay in cases. The Monitoring Committee will comprise a former judge of the Supreme Court or a Chief Justice of High Court, ED Director, CBI Director, Home Secretary to the Government of India, a judicial officer not below the rank of District Judge as nominated by the Supreme Court.The bench asked the Solicitor General to look into this suggestion made by the amicus. The bench said that number of judges and infrastructure are major issues. "We are all in hands of Mr Mehta, as and when he provides sufficient infrastructure we will hear all these", the CJI said in a lighter vein. The bench said that it will pass an order and will upload it during the course of the day.The bench hearing the PIL Ashwini Upadhyay v. Union of India regarding pendency of criminal cases against MPs & MLAs and expeditious disposal of the same by setting up of Special Courts.On the last occasion, the Apex Court had pulled up the Central Government for the delay on the part of central investigation agencies like CBI, ED and NIA in filing status reports as regards the criminal cases pending against MPs and MLAs.The Bench had granted a time of 2 weeks to SG Mehta to comply with the Court's orders and file a status report relating to the pendency of cases.The Bench had also passed two important directions :No criminal prosecution against legislators must be withdrawn without the prior nod of the High Court of the concerned states.Judges handling cases against MPs/MLAs must continue in their posts until further orders of the Supreme Court, subject to their death or retirementThe present petition was filed in the Supreme Court in 2016 demanding that convicted persons be debarred uniformly from Legislature, Executive and Judiciary.The plea has sought directions to provide adequate infrastructure to setup Special Courts to decide criminal cases related to People Representatives Public Servants and Members of Judiciary within one year and debar the convicted persons uniformly from Legislature, Executive and Judiciary.The plea has sought directions to implement the "Important Electoral Reforms" proposed by Election Commission, Law Commission and National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution;Further directions have been sought to set minimum qualification and maximum age limit for Legislatures and allow cost of the petition to petitionerCase Title: Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay & Ors vs Union of India & Ors

No Reasons Given By ED, CBI For Delay In Investigating Cases Against MPs/MLAs : Supreme Court

Srishti Ojha

Tags