Jharkhand High Court Directs CBI To Submit Detailed Report On Pending Criminal Cases Against MPs & MLAs; Expresses Displeasure Over Delay In Trials

Jharkhand High Court has directed the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to submit a comprehensive report on the criminal cases pending against Members of Parliament (MPs) and Members of Legislative Assembly (MLAs) from the state. The court ordered the probe agency to furnish the status report through an affidavit.

The direction has been made by the Division Bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Justice Navneet Kumar in the suo moto case for expeditious disposal of criminal cases against legislators in terms of directions passed by the Supreme Court in Ashwani Kumar Upadhyay v. Union of India & Anr.

In its order dated 16.04.2024, the High Court noted with dissatisfaction that the affidavits submitted by both the High Court of Jharkhand and the CBI, in compliance with a previous order dated 4.04.2024, lacked sufficient justification for the lingering pendency of criminal cases against MPs and MLAs.

The Court particularly frowned upon the reasons cited by the CBI, such as limited court resources, shortage of law officers, the complexity of cases, and stay orders from constitutional courts, as insufficient explanations for the delays in trials.

Expressing its discontent further, the Court remarked, “In the affidavit dated 16th April 2024, there is not even a whisper about the steps taken by the CBI to resolve the so-called challenges faced by it. We may also indicate that as far back as on 5th January 2022 this Court expressed its displeasure to the steps taken by the CBI so that the cases pending in the State of Jharkhand are disposed of expeditiously. There is no satisfactory response also on behalf of the State of Jharkhand which did not provide status report atleast in the last one and a half years.”

The court expounded on Section 309 of the Code of Criminal Procedure which provides that every inquiry or trial in a criminal Court shall continue from day to day until all the witnesses in attendance have been examined.

Notably, there is a special stipulation under section 309 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to the effect that the proceedings in the trial can be adjourned for the next day and, that too, for the reasons to be recorded by the Court. The provisions under Section 309 are intended for speedy trial which is a fundamental right of every accused under the Article 21 of the Constitution. The provision in law also protects the prosecution inasmuch as the chances of the accused tempering with the witnesses are minimized.

The court underscored, “This is no wonder that on account of long adjournments during the trial the witnesses are threatened and forced not to depose against the accused. This also seems to be an indisputable situation that on account of long lapse of time the witnesses, even though honest, do not support the prosecution due to loss of memory or a reason of like nature.”

“In summation, we would simply indicate that the prosecuting agency is under a statutory duty and the Constitution of India also enjoins upon it to take all prompt and necessary steps for early and speedy disposal of the cases. In our opinion, the time has come for identifying the erring officer so that the laxity on the part of the prosecuting agency is curbed at the outset,” the Court added.

The Court has adjourned the hearing in the matter for two weeks to allow time for the submission of a plan addressing two key issues: arranging for witnesses in the trial and taking action to locate a missing accused individual. The matter is now posted on 8th May for further hearing.

The Court directed, “The proposal/plan formulated by the CBI shall be prepared after a discussion with the Joint Director, CBI and the affidavit shall be sworn by an officer in the rank of the Superintendent of Police.”

“The proposal/plan by the State of Jharkhand shall be prepared on the instructions of the Inspector General of Police in consultation with the Zonal Deputy Inspector Generals of Police. The affidavit so prepared shall be sworn by the Officer so authorized by the Director General of Police,” the Court further directed.

The Court has also directed Amit Kumar Das, the Retained Counsel for the Enforcement Directorate (ED) to place on record the status report regarding the cases being prosecuted against MPs/MLAs by the ED.

Case Title: The Court on its own motion Versus The State of Jharkhand and another

Click Here To Read Order Dt. 16.04.2024

Click Here To Read Order Dt. 04.04.2024