Jan
28, 2022, Friday
NEW DELHI:
The Supreme Court on Friday set aside the one-year suspension of 12 BJP MLAs
from the Maharashtra Assembly and said this could only have been in place for
the monsoon session in July 2021. The court also termed the suspension
unconstitutional and arbitrary.
A three-judge bench headed by Justice A
M Khanwilkar said, “We have no hesitation in allowing these petitions. The
resolutions are malicious in the eyes of law, unconstitutional, illegal, and
declared to be ineffective in law. As a result of the stated declaration,
petitioners are declared to be entitled to the benefits of Members of
Legislative Assembly.”
The 12 BJP MLAs
were suspended from the Maharashtra Assembly for a year after the state
government accused them of misbehaving with Presiding Officer Bhaskar Jadhav in
the Speaker’s chamber on the first day of the monsoon session, on July 5, 2021.
Allowing the petitions of the MLAs, the
court said the resolutions passed by the Maharashtra Assembly were beyond its
powers. “Suspension is essentially a disciplinary measure. It must follow that
suspension for a period of one year would assume the character of punitive and
punishment worse than expulsion.
For, suspension
for long period and beyond the session has the effect of creating a de facto vacancy
though not a de jure vacancy,” the order stated. “Suspension beyond the session
would be bordering on punishing not only the member concerned, but also
inevitably impact the legitimate rights of the constituency from where the
member had been elected.”
The court also appeals for constructive, intelligent
debates instead of brinkmanship and said, “The Parliament/Legislative Assembly
are becoming more and more intransigent place. The philosophical tenet, one
must agree to disagree is becoming a seldom scene or a rarity during the
debates.
It has become common to hear that the House
could not complete its usual scheduled business and most of the time had been
spent in jeering and personal attacks against each other instead of erudite
constructive and educative debates consistent with the highest tradition of the
august body.” The court said there should nolt be aggression during debates in
such Houses and that matters should be settled in a more amicable manner.