JUDGEMENT

INDEX TO THE JUDGMENT FACTUAL BACKGROUND .................................................................... 2 ARGUMENTS ADDRESSED BEFORE THIS COURT ....................... 4 ISSUES BEFORE THIS COURT ............................................................ 7 ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS ................................................................... 7 i.

The Impugned Order .......................................................................... 8 ii. Examining the Directions issued in Case of Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay by the Hon‟ble Apex Court .............................................. 9 iii. Conclusion ....................................................................................... 15 SWARANA KANTA SHARMA, J.

1. The present petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (‘Cr.P.C’) has been filed on behalf of the petitioner, seeking quashing and setting aside of order dated 06.12.2023, passed by learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate-04, Rouse Avenue District Court, New Delhi in Complaint Case No. 09/2023, titled ‘Manjit Singh G.K. v. Manjinder Singh Sirsa & Ors.’ whereby the petitioner‟s application seeking transfer or return of complaint on account of lack of jurisdiction, was rejected by the learned ACMM.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

2. The background facts, leading to the filing of present petition, are that the Hon‟ble Apex Court, with the object of bringing about electoral reforms, had passed various directions in the case titled Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay v. Union of India & Anr. W.P. (C) 699/2016. These directions are contained in a series of orders starting from 01.11.2017, whereby, the setting up of Special Courts in various States including the State of Delhi, to escalate trial dealing with criminal cases in which MPs/MLAs are involved, were passed.

Thereafter, Special Courts were constituted in Delhi vide a notification dated 23.02.2018.

3. By way of present petition, it is submitted that on 09.11.2023, in the aforesaid case, detailed directions were passed by the Hon‟ble Apex Court whereby Special Courts were directed to expedite the trial of cases relating to MPs/MLAs.

4. It is the case of petitioner that he was elected as a member of Legislative Assembly of Delhi, and had become MLA on 14.04.2017, however, he had ceased to be an MLA on 11.02.2020. It is stated that the copy of the notification dated 11.02.2020, dissolving the Legislative Assembly of the NCT of Delhi, can be referred to in this regard. It is stated that since the petitioner has ceased to be an MLA on the said date, and a criminal complaint had been filed against him pertaining to the period when the petitioner had ceased to be an MLA since the allegations relate to the period post 16.02.2020, the case pending against him could not have been tried by a Special Court dealing with cases against MPs/MLAs.

5. It is also stated that respondent no. 2, who is the complainant before the learned Trial Court, had led evidence and examined certain witnesses, on the basis of which the learned ACMM had been pleased to pass summoning order dated 30.06.2023qua the present petitioner. It is stated that pursuant to the passing of the summoning order, seeking appearance of the petitioner, the petitioner had appeared before the learned Trial Court, through his counsel, since he was not in India, and the proceedings were adjourned from 17.07.2023 to 20.07.2023. The present petitioner had therefore filed a petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., for quashing of complaint case and order of summoning passed by the learned ACMM. It is stated that the petitioner had, on 26.07.2023, withdrawn the petition with liberty to file a revision petition before the learned Sessions Court.

However, the learned Sessions Court, before whom the summoning order was challenged, was also pleased to dismiss the application for setting aside the summoning order.

6. Thereafter, the petitioner had preferred an application seeking return/transf