SC seeks LS Secretary General's reply on Mahua Moitra's plea challenging her expulsion

On December 8, the Lok Sabha passed a resolution to expel Moitra from the Parliament in view of the Ethics Committee recommending her disqualification as an MP from Krishnanagar in West Bengal.

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Wednesday asked Lok Sabha Secretary General to respond to a plea by TMC leader Mahua Moitra challenging her expulsion as Member of Parliament for sharing her log in details with a Dubai-based businessman Darshan Hiranandani allegedly to ask questions related to Adani group in Parliament.

A bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta, however, refused to consider any interim relief at the moment, saying it will examine all issues, including of jurisdiction and the power of judicial review.

In its order, the bench noted that a number of issues have been raised and it will not like to comment on any issue at this stage. 

The court asked Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for Secretary General, to file a response within three weeks.

It allowed the petitioner to file a rejoinder within three weeks after and fixed the matter for consideration in the week commencing from March 11.

Senior advocate A M Singhvi on behalf of Moitra urged the court to allow her to participate in Lok Sabha proceedings.

"No no...we can't allow it, it would amount to allowing the petition," the bench said.

Singhvi sought issuance of notice on her interim prayer. To this, the bench said it would examine all issues on the next date.

During the hearing, Mehta urged the bench not to issue in the matter. 

Mehta said Parliament has its own sovereignty and is one of the three organs under the Constitution. "Parliament can internally manage disciplinary issues of its members through its inhouse procedure which is not amenable to judicial review. The petition by Moitra is not maintainable. Any interference by one organ (judiciary) into the functioning of another organ (Parliament) will violate the separation of powers enshrined under the Constitution," he said.

Singhvi, on his part, said that the alleged bribe-giver is not summoned and the Ethics Committee's findings are contradictory. He contended that the complainant suppressed the fact that she was in a relationship with him and he said that Hiranandani was asking her to submit questions.

In his arguments, Singhvi said the petitioner was expelled only for one ground of sharing her login details.

The allegations of bribery has been referred for further inquiry, he said.

He said he himself has been an MP for 18 years and no MP operated the portal on his or her own.

"There is no guidelines for controlled access. There is perversity by the Ethics Committee in its findings as there was no compliance with principle of natural justice," he said.

He also contended the petitioner was not permitted to cross examine complainant Jay Anant Dehadrai and the other private individual businessman Hiranandani.

The Ethics Committee relied upon contradictory and self serving affidavits, he alleged.

The counsel said Dehadrai suppressed the material fact that he was in relationship with her.

"There was no cross examination, no money trail and Suo Motu affidavits were accepted," he asserted.

The bench, for its part, asked if the court can go into merits of the matter.

"I am expelled on flimsy ground," he said.

On this, the bench asked there is a finding that you shared the OTP.

"Please consider Hiranandani as my assistant. Every MP shares the OTP with nominees and delegates work," he said.

He claimed the issue related to the Basic structure of Constitution, as there was a disproportionate action based on majority voice.

He also said the motion for her expulsion was moved at 2 pm, and report of the Ethics Committee was given just an hour before.

On December 8, the Lok Sabha passed a resolution to expel Moitra from Parliament in view of the Ethics Committee recommending her disqualification as an MP.

Her expulsion was recommended by the committee on the basis of Hiranandani's affidavit saying she accepted bribes, including expensive gifts to ask his questions targeting the Adani Group.

The development had come on a complaint by BJP MP Nishikant Dubey on the basis of an affidavit by Moitra's past friend advocate Jai Anant Dehadrai.