<div align="justify">The Supreme Court today refused to accord urgent hearing on a plea raising questions like whether people facing trial in serious crime cases can be allowed to contest and at which stage of trial, a lawmaker would stand disqualified.<br /><br />"We have already fixed three matters for disposal by a five-judge Constitution bench in summer vacation," a bench of Chief Justice J S Khehar and Justice D Y Chandrachud said.<br /><br />The observation came when Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay, advocate and Delhi BJP spokesperson, sought setting up of a five-judge bench and disposal of the matter in the summer vacation.<br /><br />"It is a very important issue for democracy in our country. I was assured by the court that a bench would be set up," he said, adding that it will not take more than three days in concluding the hearing.<br /><br />"You cannot imagine how much time and efforts are needed in writing judgements," the bench said while making it clear that setting up of a Constitution bench to decide the issue is not possible in the near future.<br /><br />The apex court had on January 5 said it will soon constitute a Constitution bench to decide these issues, adding that it cannot give an immediate answer to these questions since there is a fear of lodging false cases in elections.<br /><br />A three-judge bench had on March 8 last year referred various PILs including the one filed by Upadhyay to the Chief Justice of India, saying questions like can a lawmaker facing criminal trial, be disqualified at conviction stage or at the framing of charge in a case have to be decided by a larger bench.<br /><br />At present, a person, convicted in a serious criminal case, is barred from contesting polls and a lawmaker stands disqualified in the event of conviction.<br /><br />The questions, raised in the petitions, also include whether a person against whom charges are framed be permitted to contest elections. Besides Upadhyay, former Chief Election Commissioner J M Lyngdoh and NGO 'Public Interest Foundation' had filed PILs raising similar issues. The pleas were referred to the larger bench which is yet to be set up.</div>
<div align="justify">The Supreme Court today refused to accord urgent hearing on a plea raising questions like whether people facing trial in serious crime cases can be allowed to contest and at which stage of trial, a lawmaker would stand disqualified.<br /><br />"We have already fixed three matters for disposal by a five-judge Constitution bench in summer vacation," a bench of Chief Justice J S Khehar and Justice D Y Chandrachud said.<br /><br />The observation came when Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay, advocate and Delhi BJP spokesperson, sought setting up of a five-judge bench and disposal of the matter in the summer vacation.<br /><br />"It is a very important issue for democracy in our country. I was assured by the court that a bench would be set up," he said, adding that it will not take more than three days in concluding the hearing.<br /><br />"You cannot imagine how much time and efforts are needed in writing judgements," the bench said while making it clear that setting up of a Constitution bench to decide the issue is not possible in the near future.<br /><br />The apex court had on January 5 said it will soon constitute a Constitution bench to decide these issues, adding that it cannot give an immediate answer to these questions since there is a fear of lodging false cases in elections.<br /><br />A three-judge bench had on March 8 last year referred various PILs including the one filed by Upadhyay to the Chief Justice of India, saying questions like can a lawmaker facing criminal trial, be disqualified at conviction stage or at the framing of charge in a case have to be decided by a larger bench.<br /><br />At present, a person, convicted in a serious criminal case, is barred from contesting polls and a lawmaker stands disqualified in the event of conviction.<br /><br />The questions, raised in the petitions, also include whether a person against whom charges are framed be permitted to contest elections. Besides Upadhyay, former Chief Election Commissioner J M Lyngdoh and NGO 'Public Interest Foundation' had filed PILs raising similar issues. The pleas were referred to the larger bench which is yet to be set up.</div>