<p>The Supreme Court was on Saturday told that the conclusion of Criminal Rules Committee of the Madras High Court that the designation of special courts MP/MLA is unconstitutional as courts can only be ‘offence centric’ and can never be ‘offender centric’, is not correct. </p>.<p>In a report, amicus curiae, senior advocate Vijay Hansaria, along with advocate Sneha Kalita, said it is also incorrect that special courts can never be constituted by judicial order as stated by the HC in its observation on October 13, last.</p>.<p>"The MPs/MLAs constitute a class in themselves and thus special courts can be constituted for expeditious trial of criminal cases against MPs/MLAs, which is in public interest. Thus, special courts MP/MLA designated by issue of a notification by state governments after consultation with the High Courts is constitutionally valid," it said.</p>.<p>In order to ensure speedy disposal of criminal cases against the elected representatives to the Parliament and the State legislatures including former MPs/ MLAs, the Union government sanctioned special courts following the top court's suggestion in a PIL filed by BJP leader and advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay.</p>.<p><strong>Also Read | <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/national/south/special-courts-for-mp/mlas-not-unconstitutional-sc-told-1050336.html" target="_blank">Special courts for MP/MLAs not unconstitutional, SC told</a></strong></p>.<p>"The legislators are lawmakers who lay down policies for socio-economic development of the country and are responsible for upholding constitutional morality. It is on record that a large number of cases, including heinous offences, are pending in the courts not only for years but for decades," the report said.</p>.<p>"In such circumstances, a special mechanism for speedy trial of these cases cannot be flawed. No special procedure less advantageous to the accused persons has been prescribed for trial of cases involving MPs/ MLAs; these cases are tried as per general procedure prescribed under the Criminal Procedure Code," it added. </p>.<p>The report also pointed out statutory special courts constituted under PC Act, SC/ST Act, PML Act, POCSO Act or any other statute made by Parliament or State legislature shall ‘ordinarily’ have jurisdiction to try cases for offences committed under these statutes. However, trial of cases under the special statutes by the special courts MP/MLAs are valid and do not suffer from any constitutional infirmity as these courts have been constituted under the direction of the top court issued in exercise of the power under Article 142 of the Constitution. </p>.<p>The report also asked the court to confirm designation of judicial officers presiding over special courts and allow them to hold the post for two years. It also sought a direction to the central government to make necessary funds available for the purpose of making video conference facilities including witness examination in all the courts.</p>.<p><strong>Check out latest DH videos here</strong></p>
<p>The Supreme Court was on Saturday told that the conclusion of Criminal Rules Committee of the Madras High Court that the designation of special courts MP/MLA is unconstitutional as courts can only be ‘offence centric’ and can never be ‘offender centric’, is not correct. </p>.<p>In a report, amicus curiae, senior advocate Vijay Hansaria, along with advocate Sneha Kalita, said it is also incorrect that special courts can never be constituted by judicial order as stated by the HC in its observation on October 13, last.</p>.<p>"The MPs/MLAs constitute a class in themselves and thus special courts can be constituted for expeditious trial of criminal cases against MPs/MLAs, which is in public interest. Thus, special courts MP/MLA designated by issue of a notification by state governments after consultation with the High Courts is constitutionally valid," it said.</p>.<p>In order to ensure speedy disposal of criminal cases against the elected representatives to the Parliament and the State legislatures including former MPs/ MLAs, the Union government sanctioned special courts following the top court's suggestion in a PIL filed by BJP leader and advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay.</p>.<p><strong>Also Read | <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/national/south/special-courts-for-mp/mlas-not-unconstitutional-sc-told-1050336.html" target="_blank">Special courts for MP/MLAs not unconstitutional, SC told</a></strong></p>.<p>"The legislators are lawmakers who lay down policies for socio-economic development of the country and are responsible for upholding constitutional morality. It is on record that a large number of cases, including heinous offences, are pending in the courts not only for years but for decades," the report said.</p>.<p>"In such circumstances, a special mechanism for speedy trial of these cases cannot be flawed. No special procedure less advantageous to the accused persons has been prescribed for trial of cases involving MPs/ MLAs; these cases are tried as per general procedure prescribed under the Criminal Procedure Code," it added. </p>.<p>The report also pointed out statutory special courts constituted under PC Act, SC/ST Act, PML Act, POCSO Act or any other statute made by Parliament or State legislature shall ‘ordinarily’ have jurisdiction to try cases for offences committed under these statutes. However, trial of cases under the special statutes by the special courts MP/MLAs are valid and do not suffer from any constitutional infirmity as these courts have been constituted under the direction of the top court issued in exercise of the power under Article 142 of the Constitution. </p>.<p>The report also asked the court to confirm designation of judicial officers presiding over special courts and allow them to hold the post for two years. It also sought a direction to the central government to make necessary funds available for the purpose of making video conference facilities including witness examination in all the courts.</p>.<p><strong>Check out latest DH videos here</strong></p>
