BJP MLAs Were Given Excess Punishment, Without Being Heard: Delhi HC

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday disposed of the petitions moved by seven BJP MLAs challenging their suspension for an indefinite period by the Speaker of the Delhi Legislative Assembly.

The High Court said that the MLAs were given excess punishment prescribed under rules and without being heard. It was also said that the matter was referred to a committee of privileges without application of mind.

While disposing of petitions, Justice Subramonium Prasad said that the petitioners have been given a punishment in excess of what can be given under Rule 44 of the Fifth Schedule, and at the same time, the petitioners have been given a punishment under Rule 77 of Chapter XI, which is a suspension for an indefinite period without even being heard.

"In the absence of any application of mind by the Speaker in. referring the matter to the Committee of Privileges and in view of the fact that the Petitioners have not been heard while being given the punishment of suspension till the Committee of Privileges decides the matter and since the punishment under Rule 77 of Chapter XI can be prescribed only after a member is heard, the direction for suspending the petitioners till the Committee of Privileges takes a decision cannot be sustained," Justice Prasad held in the judgement passed on March 6.

Justice Prasad pointed out, "The upshot of this is that the decision. of the House to send the issue before the Committee of Privileges without the Speaker independently applying his mind as postulated under Rule 70 of Chapter XI and the decision of the House to suspend the petitioners till the Committee of Privileges takes a decision both are in violation of the procedure prescribed under the Fifth Schedule and Chapter XI."

The High Court opined that since the petitioners have already undergone the suspension of 14 sittings, this court is of the opinion that the petitioners should be permitted to rejoin the House forthwith.

With these observations, the High Court disposed of the petitions moved by seven BJP MLAs, namely Vijender Gupta, Ajay Mahawar, Mohan Singh Bisht, O P Sharma, Jitender Mahajan and Anil Vajpayee.

The allegation against the petitioners was that the petitioners, along with other members of the House, interrupted the address of the Lieutenant Governor on February 15, 2024.

The petitioners marched out on February 15 and they were permitted to rejoin in the next sitting, which is on February 16.

On February 16, a motion was moved against the petitioners by Dilip Kumar Pandey, Chief Whip of AAP, and the House took a decision to refer the question of breach of privilege and contempt to the Committee of Privileges and suspended the petitioners till the Committee of Privileges submits its findings on the question. of breach of privilege and contempt.

The High Court noted that the petitioners have been suspended till the Committee of Privileges decides on the question, which is not one of the punishments that are prescribed in Clause 44 of the Fifth Schedule.

Clause 44(e) of the Fifth Schedule gives power to the presiding officer or the House to suspend a member only for a definite period and not indefinitely, the court noted.

The court said that for a breach of the Code of Conduct, the petitioners could have been given only any one of the punishments provided under Clause 44 of the Fifth Schedule, which does not stipulate a suspension for an indefinite period.

"Since the suspension can be only for a specific period and not indefinitely, i.e., till the Committee of Privileges decides on the question of breach of privilege, the suspension of the petitioners until the Committee of Privileges takes a decision is, therefore, beyond the purview of Clause 44 of the Fifth Schedule and is, therefore, unsustainable," the High Court said.

(ANI)