Back
Quashes Against Mahua Moitra, Transfers Case to Special MP/MLA Court
The on provided major relief to Trinamool Congress MP Mahua Moitra by quashing an issued against her by a and transferring the case to the . A of Justice Debangsu Basak and Justice Aryak Dutt set aside all of the lower court, directing that the be treated as being at the stage.
Background: A Controversial Remark Leads to
The case stems from a remark Moitra made on
, during which she allegedly said,
"Instead of throwing eggs like this, throw them while wearing a burqa; then no
will be filed against you."
The complainant claimed the statement could hurt religious sentiments and filed a
before the
, Nadia district. The magistrate issued
to Moitra, and when she failed to appear, an
was issued on
.
Moitra challenged the warrant before the , which on stayed its pending hearing.
Arguments: and Allegations Under Scrutiny
Appearing for Moitra, advocates , , and others argued that since the alleged speeches and the filing of the occurred during her tenure as an MP, the case could only be tried by the , not by a regular magistrate’s court. They also contended that the allegations were baseless and did not constitute a .
The state and the , represented by advocates and respectively, sought to defend the before the , arguing that the magistrate had to take .
Court's Reasoning: Directives Prevail
The high court declined to enter into the debate on raised by the parties. Instead, it relied on the 's observations in Ashim Kumar Upadhyay vs. Union of India & Anr. (2017) and subsequent pronouncements, which stressed that against Members of Parliament and state legislatures should be dealt with by as expeditiously as possible.
The bench noted that the present was before a court not designated for trying offenses against MPs/MLAs. Therefore, it was appropriate to the case to the , North 24-Parganas.
Key observations from the judgment include:
“We find that in Ashim Kumar Upadhyay vs. Union of India & Anr. reported in 2017 SCC OnLine SC 2195 and all the previous and subsequent pronouncements thereof, the desire of the was that the proceeding against a Member of Parliament or a Member of the State Legislature should be dealt with by specified Court as expeditiously as possible.”
The court also held that the transferor court's and all consequent orders were set aside, and the transferee court must treat the as being at the stage.
Decision: Case Transferred, Quashed
The high court disposed of the , directing the District Judge of Nadia to transmit all records to the District Judge of North 24-Parganas, who will then send them to the . The Special Court is instructed to proceed in accordance with law, treating the as .
The practical effect of this order is that the case against Moitra essentially resets to its initial stage before the designated court, effectively nullifying the and the taken by the Krishnanagar magistrate. This decision reinforces the 's mandate for speedy and specialized handling of cases against elected representatives.
