SC seeks law panel's view on disqualification of lawmakers

Image
Press Trust of India New Delhi
Last Updated : Dec 16 2013 | 5:32 PM IST
The Supreme Court today asked the Law Commission to examine whether lawmakers can be disqualified either upon framing of charges by a court in heinous crimes or with the filing of charge sheet and also evolve a mechanism for verifying veracity of affidavits.
The apex court said since the Law Commission is carrying out the research and preparing a comprehensive report on electoral reforms, it can give its report on these aspects which can be submitted to the Centre by February 2014 so that it is deliberated upon on March 10.
The two pointed questions were referred to by a bench of justices R M Lodha and Shivakirti Singh to the Law Commission.
The first question was whether a person can be disqualified on conviction or upon framing of charges by court in heinous crimes or with the filing of charge sheet?
Secondly, can there be a disqualification on filing false affidavit and if yes, what can be the mechanism for verifying the affidavits?
The court was hearing a PIL filed by NGO, Public Interest Foundation, demanding a ban on people charged with criminal offences from contesting polls.
The Election Commission has already proposed before Supreme Court that any person against whom a court has framed charges for offences punishable with a jail term of five years or more should be barred from contesting polls.
In an affidavit filed in the apex court, the EC had said that after being named in a case, a person ceases to have the integrity which is a must for any candidate seeking high public office.
"(After the framing of charges), the integrity and character of the accused is under scrutiny and he ceases to have the requisite excellence and integrity to be considered as a candidate for high public office," EC had said in its affidavit.
EC had earlier said that it was pertinent to note that the framing of charges against an accused is done after the allegations and evidence have undergone judicial scrutiny.
Thus, charges are only framed against an accused after judicial notice has been taken of the charges and the court finds that a prima facie case exists, EC had said.
*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: Dec 16 2013 | 5:32 PM IST

Next Story