No review on convicted MPs/MLAs, SC to relook barring arrested

The apex court, however, said that Parliament is free to amend law if it does not agree with interpretation of law given by the Supreme Court

<a href="http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-133683230/stock-photo-scales-of-justice-gavel-and-books.html" target="_blank">Gavel</a> image via Shutterstock
Press Trust of India New Delhi
Last Updated : Sep 04 2013 | 6:35 PM IST
The Supreme Court today refused to review its verdict that an MP or MLA convicted of any criminal offence attracting a punishment of two years and above will be disqualified immediately but agreed to relook its other judgement debarring arrested persons from contesting polls.

The apex court, however, said that Parliament is free to amend law if it does not agree with interpretation of law given by the Supreme Court.

A bench of justices A K Patnaik and S J Mukhopadhyay said that it would hear review plea on the limited ground whether disqualification mentioned in the constitution bars an arrested person from contesting election or not.

It also raised questioned on why Centre preferred not to argue the case when the matter was being heard.

It also said that the Representation of People's Act is "clumsy" which caused the confusion and said that "The object of the provision was to keep the person with criminal background away from election."

"Parliament frames laws in the manner they like. If we make interpretation of law and if it is not accepted by it (Parliament), its again for Parliament to enact a law," it said.

Referring to its July 10 judgement that convicted legislatures would be disqualified as members of the House, the bench said, "There is no error on the face of the law but there can be on interpretation. We found that there are lacunae in law in this regard which can be considered by the legislatures."

It said since there was no error in its verdict. Parliament accepted it and came out with the Amendment Bill in RPA which was pased by Rajya Sabha.

"We are not inclined. It is a well considered judgement. Everybody should accept it. We are glad that Parliament has accepted," it said, adding, "We don't find any error apparent in the judgement of July 10. Hence, it (review petition) is dismissed."

The bench also said that Parliament can go ahead with the amendment saying "We don't want to stall the legislators who have come out with the bill.
*Subscribe to Business Standard digital and get complimentary access to The New York Times

Smart Quarterly

₹900

3 Months

₹300/Month

SAVE 25%

Smart Essential

₹2,700

1 Year

₹225/Month

SAVE 46%
*Complimentary New York Times access for the 2nd year will be given after 12 months

Super Saver

₹3,900

2 Years

₹162/Month

Subscribe

Renews automatically, cancel anytime

Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans

Exclusive premium stories online

  • Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors

Complimentary Access to The New York Times

  • News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic

Business Standard Epaper

  • Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share

Curated Newsletters

  • Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox

Market Analysis & Investment Insights

  • In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor

Archives

  • Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997

Ad-free Reading

  • Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements

Seamless Access Across All Devices

  • Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app

More From This Section

First Published: Sep 04 2013 | 6:31 PM IST

Next Story