The Supreme Court has directed the Lok Sabha secretary general to address Trinamool Congress MP Mahua Moitra’s plea challenging her expulsion from the Lok Sabha for alleged ethical misconduct. While the court agreed to scrutinize Moitra’s case in detail, it declined her participation in the House proceedings temporarily, citing pending jurisdictional and judicial review concerns.
Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta presided over the hearing, acknowledging potential jurisdictional issues and the scope of judicial review concerning legislative decisions. The court emphasized an open examination of these matters while asking for the Lok Sabha secretary general’s response within three weeks. The next hearing, slated for March, will further address these pivotal concerns.
During the proceedings, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Lok Sabha secretary general, questioned the extent of judicial review in matters concerning the internal discipline of a sovereign state organ. In response, senior counsel Abhishek Manu Singhvi, representing Moitra, criticized the expulsion as an attempt to stifle opposition voices and expressed dissatisfaction with the expulsion based on allegedly trivial grounds.
Despite Mehta’s plea not to issue formal notice due to concerns of separation of powers and national security threats from Moitra’s actions, the bench issued notice, leaving all pertinent issues, including jurisdiction, open for subsequent deliberation.
Singhvi sought interim relief for Moitra’s participation in House proceedings, which the bench declined, stating that it could inadvertently favor Moitra’s petition. The TMC MP from Krishnanagar, West Bengal, faced expulsion on December 8 over cash-for-query allegations, citing “substantial illegality” and “arbitrariness” in the ethics committee’s recommendations that led to her expulsion.
Moitra’s petition contested the disqualification process, highlighting her lack of opportunity to defend herself during the House discussion on the ethics committee’s findings. Singhvi emphasized that Moitra’s expulsion centered on sharing login credentials, with no evidence of illicit financial gains or misconduct.
The senior counsel argued that Moitra sharing login OTPs lacked the use of the portal, as an additional step for authentication via OTP was required. Moreover, Singhvi criticized the ethics committee’s procedural shortcomings, emphasizing Moitra’s denial of the chance to cross-examine relevant individuals.
As the court deliberated on its role in reviewing the matter’s merits, Singhvi raised concerns about MPs facing expulsion based on tenuous grounds without legal recourse, highlighting Moitra’s alleged sharing of OTPs, a practice reportedly prevalent among several MPs.
The hearing underscores a legal battle challenging Moitra’s expulsion, questioning procedural fairness and the grounds for disciplinary action within parliamentary norms. The Supreme Court’s forthcoming decision in March holds significance in determining the contours of legislative authority and judicial intervention in matters of internal discipline within parliamentary proceedings.
Sources By Agencies
