In a significant development, the Supreme Court of India has issued a notice to the Secretary General of the Lok Sabha, seeking a response regarding the expulsion plea of former Member of Parliament (MP) Mahua Moitra. The division bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta, while issuing the notice, highlighted that one of the key issues to be addressed is the jurisdiction of the court to review the actions of the Lok Sabha. The Secretary General has been directed to file a response within three weeks, followed by a rejoinder from the petitioner, if any, within the subsequent three weeks. The matter is scheduled for hearing in the week commencing from March 11, 2024.
The bench also declined an interim measure requested by Senior Advocate Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi, representing Moitra, to allow her to attend Lok Sabha proceedings in the meantime. Justice Khanna stated,
“No no, that will be virtually allowing your writ petition. When we are ourselves in doubt as to the extent of our examination…”
Moitra, who represented the Krishnanagar Lok Sabha seat in West Bengal, was expelled on December 8 following the adoption of an ethics committee report accusing her of unethical conduct over cash-for-query allegations. Singhvi argued that the only concrete finding against Moitra in the ethics committee report was the unauthorized sharing of her MP portal login credentials with third parties. He contended that there is no rule prohibiting the sharing of login credentials and that it is a standard practice among MPs.
The bench questioned Singhvi,
“So you accept that you shared the OTP with Hiranandani?”
to which Singhvi replied affirming that delegation of work to secretaries or assistants is common among parliamentarians.
Singhvi also raised concerns about violations of the principles of natural justice, as Darshan Hiranandani, who made allegations against Moitra, was not allowed to be cross-examined. He emphasized the grave constitutional importance of the matter, stating,
“If you pick up every irregularity and start expelling people, then there is no question of democracy.”
Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta, representing the Lok Sabha Secretary General, argued that the court should not interfere with the internal functioning of the legislature, citing the doctrine of the separation of powers.
The controversy surrounding Moitra unfolded after BJP MP Nishikant Dubey wrote to Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla, based on a complaint alleging that Moitra accepted money and favors to pose questions in Parliament. The ethics committee, after its probe, recommended Moitra’s expulsion in connection with the ‘cash-for-query’ scandal.
Moitra has consistently denied these allegations, criticizing the ethics committee for acting without proof and claiming that it was weaponized to target the opposition. She lamented not being given an opportunity to defend herself in the House or cross-examine her accusers.
Following her expulsion, Moitra moved the Supreme Court, highlighting the lack of opportunity to defend herself during the Lok Sabha discussion on the ethics panel’s findings. This case represents a crucial intersection of parliamentary ethics, legal jurisdiction, and the principles of natural justice within the framework of Indian democracy.
Also read-Supreme Court To Review Mahua Moitra’s Urgent Plea Against Lok Sabha Expulsion (lawchakra.in)
