Special Courts for MPs/MLAs can try cases against former and sitting legislators irrespective of their status at the time of the alleged offence.

JUDGMENT :

A. Guneshwar Sharma, J.

1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner/accused under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short, CrPC) for quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated 04.07.2022 passed in Cril. Misc. Case No. 152 of 2022 [Ref: Cril. (C ) Case No. 10 of 2022] by the learned Special Court for MPs/MLAs No. 2, Manipur at Lamphel Court complex and also the entire Cril. (C) Case No. 10 of 2022 now pending before the same Court.

2. The petitioner/accused has also filed Misc. Case (Cril. Petn.) No. 23 of 2022 to suspend/stay the impugned order dated 04.07.2022 passed in Cril. Complaint Case No. 10 of 2022 with further proceeding of the said case pending final disposal of the instant case, ie, Cril. Petition No. 27 of 2022.

3. On 28.07.2022, this Court passed an interim order in Misc. Case (Cril. Petn.) No. 23 of 2022 staying the appearance of the applicant before the trial Court till the next date of hearing and the interim order has been extended from time to time.

4. The point for determination involved in the present case is whether the Special Court MPs/MLAs has jurisdiction to try offences committed by former/sitting legislature when he/she was not an elected member.

5. The brief facts pertaining to the filling of the criminal complaint case are as follow :

I. The respondent/complainant filed his nomination paper for the 12th Manipur Legislative Assembly Election before the Returning Officer of 37 – Kakching Assembly Constituency on 9/02/2022 and 10/02/2022.

II. During the scrutiny on 14th February 2022, the petitioner/Accused person No.1 submitted an objection to the nomination paper of the complainant to the 12th State Assembly Election before the Returning Officer of Kakching/Thoubal on the ground of non-disclosure of a pending FIR being FIR No. 14 (1) 2018 of City Police Station in the Affidavit Form- 26 dated 09/02/2022 and 10/02/2022.

III. The said objection was rejected by the Returning Officer of 37-Kakching AC vide Order No. RO/KCG/37/SAE/2022/1 dated 14.02.2022 on the ground that the said objection was not enough for rejection of the candidature of the complainant.

IV. Upon checking with the concerned police station, as the said fact was not in the knowledge of the complainant, it has been informed that the above said FIR has been registered based on a complaint filed by the Accused person No. 2 i.e., the son of the Accused person No. 1 namely Yengkhom Mayeksana Singh, against unknown persons.

V. Such preliminary information, on the face of it, appears to be suspicious with dubious motive which prompted the complainant to further verify it, which leads to a conclusive answer that a false, fabricated, concocted complaint was filed by the Accused No. 2 and it was manipulatively misused by the petitioner/Accused No. 1 with ulterior motive and nefarious design.

VI. The report of Investigation Officer, after exhaustive inquiry/ investigation, comprises the comment dated 27.02.2022 that it has been found that “on 28.08.2018 the case was re-endorsed by an order of SP/Imphal West vide Memo No. 5/1/SP/IW/2018/608 dated 28.08.2018 and identity of the unknown culprits could not be established.

VII. The complainant submitted that the accused have defamed the complainant with publication of the defamatory statement in various form in oral and written form intending to harm, knowingly with reason to believe that imputation fabricated and designed by them will harm the reputation of the complainant.

VIII. The accused persons have defamed the name of the complainant in various occasions while carrying out election campaign amongst the general public.

IX. The respondent/complainant also lodged a complaint with the SP Kakching on 01.03.2022 but so far nothing has been initiated.

X. The respondent/complainant filed a Cril. (Complaint) Case No. 10 of 2022 before the learned Special Court for MLA/MP No. 2, Manipur against the accused persons for continuously defaming the Complainant before the publi