Suspension of conviction, sentence of MP Faizal by Ker HC will have wider ramification: UT to SC

4 min read
Read later

Mohammed Faizal | Photo: Mathrubhumi

New Delhi: The suspension of Lakshadweep MP Mohammed Faizal's conviction and sentence in an attempt to murder case by the Kerala High Court will have wider ramifications, the Union Territory's administration told the Supreme Court on Monday.

The Lakshadweep's administration on Monday told the Supreme Court that suspending the conviction and sentence of the Union Territory's MP Mohammed Faizal in an attempt to murder case by the Kerala High Court will have wider ramifications.

Also Read

EC withholds Lakshadweep LS bypoll after ...

Kerala HC suspends conviction, sentence ...

A bench of justices KM Joseph and BV Nagarathna was told by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Union Territory (UT), that the high court has erred in suspending the conviction and sentence of Faizal.

"Suspension of conviction and sentence is an exception and not a rule. There are several judgments of this court which says that a lawmaker stands disqualified once there is conviction in heinous offence. This order of the high court if not stayed will have wider ramifications," Mehta said.

He said the high court has suspended the conviction on the ground that if elections are held after Faizal's disqualification, it will have an impact on the government exchequer and development works which have been undertaken.

"This will have effect on rigours of Section 8 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951", Mehta said.

The bench, however, posted the matter for further hearing on February 13 and asked Mehta to place on record the judgments he is relying upon.

On January 30, the top court had agreed to hear a plea by the Lakshadweep administration challenging the January 25 order of the Kerala High Court that had suspended the conviction of Faizal in an attempt to murder case.

Faizal stood disqualified from the membership of the Lok Sabha from January 11, the date of his conviction by a sessions court in Kavaratti, according to a notification issued on January 13 by the Lok Sabha Secretariat.

Later, on January 25, the high court had suspended his conviction and sentence until disposal of the appeal before it, saying that not doing so would result in fresh elections for his vacant seat which would impose an immense financial burden on the government and the public.

In the plea, filed through advocate Akshay Amritanshu, the UT's administration has said through the interim order, the high court has suspended the conviction and sentence imposed on Faizal till the disposal of the appeal before it.

"In the present case, the respondent no.1 (Faizal) failed to make out any exceptional circumstance for his conviction to be suspended and the reason assigned by the high court for suspension of conviction and sentence is alien to the exercise of jurisdiction under section 389 (of the) CrPC," it said.

The plea claimed the implication of the interim order is that "any and every disqualification of an elected representative would automatically have to be suspended, as every conviction leading to disqualification and consequently bye-election, would call for (i) financial burden to the state exchequer and (ii) limited/lesser tenure of the elected candidate".

On January 30, the Election Commission had withheld the Lakshadweep Lok Sabha bypoll after the high court suspended the conviction and sentence of Faizal in the case.

The poll panel had announced the bypoll recently and it is to be held on February 27.

The bypoll was announced following the disqualification Faizal on grounds of his conviction by the sessions court.

In its plea filed in the apex court challenging the January 25 order of the high court, the UT administration has referred to several verdicts of the top court and said in no case it has held that financial burden or duration of tenure would be a criteria or would fall within the rare and exceptional category to suspend conviction.

"The principles of democracy, purity of elections and decriminalisation of politics have all been accepted and acknowledged by the high court but ignored by the high court while passing the interim impugned order," it said.

The plea said the consequence of the interim order is that the disqualification of Faizal is "wiped out" and the mandate and spirit of Article 102 of the Constitution and Section 8 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, is nullified.

It said the entire object of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, to disqualify convicted elected representatives and to ensure convicted elected representatives are disqualified "stands negated" by the interim order of the high court.

The plea claimed the right to contest an election is not a fundamental right, but a statutory right and the high court gave "undue weightage" to the fact that general elections were due in 2024.

"The inadvertent consequence of this observation is that even an MP who may be convicted in extremely serious cases - terror related etc., would be able to get suspension of conviction," it said.

It said the high court has failed to appreciate the drastic effect of suspension of conviction on rule of law, public interest and the principle of decriminalisation/purity of politics should far outweigh any interest of Faizal.

"The high court had misdirected itself while observing that holding of elections would lead to various developmental activities in Lakshadweep coming to a halt for a few weeks. It is submitted that holding of elections is an essential feature of democracy," the plea said.

It said an elected member of Parliament, who stands convicted of attempt to murder along with being an accused in three other cases, is a "serious reflection" of the character of the accused. PTI

Add Comment
Related Topics

Get daily updates from

Disclaimer: Kindly avoid objectionable, derogatory, unlawful and lewd comments, while responding to reports. Such comments are punishable under cyber laws. Please keep away from personal attacks. The opinions expressed here are the personal opinions of readers and not that of Mathrubhumi.