Read Time: 06 minutes

Synopsis

The Delhi High Court on Monday dismissed a plea filed by BJP leader and former MLA Manjinder Singh Sirsa, challenging the jurisdiction of a special court designated for cases against MPs or MLAs to try him in a criminal complaint.

The court held that the special courts were established to address cases involving legislators, whether current or former.

The bench of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma referred to previous orders by the Supreme Court, highlighting that special courts were designed to handle cases against MPs or MLAs, regardless of their current legislative status.

The court emphasized that Sirsa's counsel failed to demonstrate how an expedited trial could prejudice him. It affirmed the trial court's decision, which had rejected Sirsa's plea seeking the transfer or return of the complaint due to jurisdictional issues.

“This court concurs with the decision of the additional chief metropolitan magistrate (ACMM), whereby it was observed that whether a sitting legislator commits an offence or an offence is allegedly committed by a former legislator, a case can be tried by the Special Court, set up for dealing with cases against the MPs/ MLAs whether sitting or former,” the high court stated.

Special courts were established in Delhi in 2018 following a Supreme Court judgment to expedite trials involving criminal cases against lawmakers.

Sirsa, who switched from the Shiromani Akali Dal to the BJP in December 2021, argued in his plea that the criminal complaint against him related to a period when he was no longer an MLA. He also contended that the case could not be tried by a special court designated for cases against MPs or MLAs.

The court stressed that it lacked the jurisdiction to interpret the Supreme Court's decision differently and noted that the special courts could try offences against sitting or former MPs/MLAs without a specific bar on the trial of individuals who had ceased to be legislators when the alleged offence occurred.

“This Court lacks the jurisdiction to interpret the decision in a manner that deviates from the clear directions of the Hon’ble Apex Court. In other words, this Court cannot read something in between the lines, which is neither the intent nor the content, finding, or even obiter of the Hon’ble Apex Court," Justice Sharma said.

“Therefore, the necessary inference that can essentially be drawn up from the above-mentioned reading of the four orders, would lead to a conclusion that the Special Courts were constituted to try offences alleged against sitting or former MPs/MLAs, and the Hon'ble Apex Court nowhere has observed that the Special Courts shall try only those offences where accused was a sitting MP/MLA, at the time of commission of the offense," the court added.

Case Title: Manjinder Singh Sirsa v. State of NCT of Delhi and Anr.