Supreme Court to reexamine JMM MPs bribery case judgment of 1998

A bench of Supreme Court of India comprising Justices T.S.Thakur, R.Banumathi in SLP (Crl) 2758/2014 titled as “Sita Soren vs Union of India through CBI” in its order on 23^rd September 2014 referred the issue of corruption by a MP/MLA to a larger bench. The court said “Since the issue arises for consideration is substantial and of general public importance, we refer these matters to a larger Bench of three Hon'ble Judges to be constituted by Hon'ble the Chief Justice of India”.

The case is that the Election Commission had in April 2012 countermanded the Rajya Sabha elections in Jharkhand and handed over probe to CBI following allegations of bribery. The CBI in its charge-sheet had accused Sita Soren of receiving Rs 1.5 lakh for proposing nomination and also casting vote in favour of Raj Kumar Agarwal, an independent candidate. She challenged her prosecution claiming immunity under Article 194(2) of the Constitution of India, which provided that no member of legislature of a state shall be liable to any proceedings in any court in respect of anything said or any vote given by him/her in the legislature or any committee thereof. She cited the 1998 judgment in JMM MPs bribery case ( in which the apex court granted immunity from prosecution to MPs who took bribe and voted to save the then Congress government of P V Narasimha Rao in Parliament). Jharkhand High Court rejected her plea by coming to a conclusion that since she had not voted for the candidate for whom the bribe was allegedly paid, she was not entitled to immunity from prosecution as in the JMM MPs case the Supreme Court had allowed Ajit Singh's prosecution for not voting even after allegedly taking bribe.

The Supreme Court was of the view that the 1998 judgment in JMM MPs bribery case need a fresh look and hence referred the matter to CJI for constitution of a 3-Judge bench to decide the issue. As per the procedure adopted by the apex court, a two-judge bench can refer a question of law to a three-judge bench, which alone can decide whether such a question merited consideration by a constitution bench. 

In JMM MPs bribery case, a Constitution bench by a 3-2 majority had held that those who took bribe but did not vote were liable to be prosecuted under Prevention of Corruption Act as they would not be entitled to immunity from prosecution granted to MPs under Article 105(2) of the Constitution. 

People indulging in Cow slaughter sentenced to life imprisonment by Delhi Sessions Court

The court of Ms. Kamini Lao, Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi , in its 538 page judgment on 9th October 2014, convicted and awarded life imprisonment to seven persons who were indulging in transport and slaughter of cows illegally. They were members of a Mewat gang and they were held guilty of firing at police officials who were trying to rescue cows that were being illegally taken by them for slaughtering. The case related to an encounter between a gang of cattle lifters from Mewat, on the outskirts of Delhi, and the Delhi police in the Outer Delhi district on the intervening night of January 18-19, 2013, when the accused were trying to flee by taking away three cows, one calf and a buffalo from a dairy in Rohini's sector 16-17 for the purpose of slaughtering. During the encounter, one of the gang members died while a cop sustained injury. 

The court also called for the immediate need to set right the mechanism for rescuing animals rampantly released on 'superdari' (undertaking) to those who were accused of the violation of special laws relating to protection of animals. The court said that people are taking advantage of lacuna in existing laws dealing with the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, the Delhi Agriculture Cattle Preservation Act and also the general law (Indian Penal Code/ Code of Criminal Procedure) as these laws are totally silent on how these rescued animals are required to be dealt with. The Court said "Under no circumstances can these animals/cattle be handed over to the same persons from whose clutches they have been rescued. Cattle wealth of the country has to be protected at any cost not only because it is connected to important issues of national health but also because its an issue which is closely knitted to religious beliefs and sentiments of a class of society which have to be respected".

The court observed that, though cattle slaughtering was banned in Delhi, there were many loopholes in the law which prohibits the slaughter. The court called upon the Government to create a policy and a foolproof mechanism for protecting cattle in the country. The demands for banning of cattle slaughter across the country found backing of the court which said that cattle needs to be protected not only because of health reasons but also because it is closely knitted to religious beliefs of a section of society. Pertinently, cattle slaughter is banned in most states in the country but is legal in some states.

Click below for reading the Full Judgment.

Full Judgmemt