The Supreme Court agreed to examine Himachal Pradesh’s plea challenging a high court order that stopped the withdrawal of 45 cases against MPs and MLAs. The matter includes cases filed under the previous BJP government against Congress workers for Covid-era rallies.
The Supreme Court agreed to consider a petition from the Himachal Pradesh government challenging a high court order that prohibits the withdrawal of 45 cases against MPs and MLAs.
This includes cases filed during the previous BJP administration against Congress workers who held rallies amid the Covid pandemic.
A bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi issued a notice regarding the petition, which contests the April 26, 2024, ruling from the High Court of Himachal Pradesh that only permitted the withdrawal of 15 out of the 65 criminal cases recommended by the state’s home department.
ALSO READ: Himachal Advocates Protest Against Proposed Amendments to Advocates Act
The high court noted that five of these cases, including one involving Chief Minister Sukhu, were resolved while the petition was pending.
Senior advocate V Giri, representing the state government, requested the Supreme Court’s permission to dismiss these cases in the interest of the public, having consulted with public prosecutors, district attorneys, district magistrates, and superintendents of police.
The bench has scheduled the hearing for March 16.
In its April 26 ruling, the high court rejected the plea to withdraw cases related to offenses under IPC sections 269 (negligent acts likely to spread dangerous disease), 353 (assaulting a public servant), 504 (intentional insult likely to provoke breach of peace), and 506 (criminal intimidation), as well as sections of the National Highways Act and the Disaster Management Act.
The court indicated that while Section 321 of the CrPC does not mandate prior approval from the high court for withdrawing prosecutions, such permission has become necessary due to a Supreme Court ruling in the Ashwani Kumar Upadhyay vs. Union of India (2020) case.
This decision emphasized that a public prosecutor may withdraw from a prosecution not solely based on insufficient evidence but also to promote the broader goals of public justice.
Moreover, the high court highlighted that the apex court directed public prosecutors to form an independent opinion before seeking court consent to withdraw from prosecution and that the authority granted under Section 321 of the CrPC should be exercised in good faith and for the greater public interest, free from political motivations.