Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay Petitioner(s) v. Union Of India And Another (s)., Supreme Court Of India, Judgment, Law, casemine.com

Factual and Procedural Background

The Court heard learned counsel for the parties. The Amicus Curiae informed the Court that insufficient information from various High Courts regarding pending cases against sitting and former MLAs and MPs impeded his ability to assist the Court in relation to the establishment of Special Courts.

In response, a standardized format for collecting the requisite information from the High Courts was proposed by the Amicus Curiae in consultation with other senior counsel and counsel for the parties. Upon perusing the proposed format, the Court required the addition of one more column—Column No. 13—to capture the “expected time of completion of trial.”

The Court directed that this format be emailed forthwith to the Registrar Generals of all High Courts, who must furnish the information to the Amicus Curiae in both hard copy and soft copy (via email to amicus.vijayhansaria@gmail.com) expeditiously and preferably within two weeks, with a copy also sent to the Secretary General of the Supreme Court.

For the States of Bihar and Kerala, the Court sought additional information regarding the status of cases following the Court’s order dated 4-12-2018 in WP(C) No. 699 of 2016, including: (a) number of cases decided, (b) number of cases in which evidence is recorded, (c) number of cases in which charges have been framed, (d) progress reports in terms of paragraph 7 of that order and any administrative directions issued by the respective High Courts, and (e) disposal rates of such cases before and after the 4-12-2018 order.

Interlocutory Application No. 71929 of 2019 seeking impleadment, as prayed by Mr. Sanjay R. Hegde, learned Senior Counsel, was allowed. The matter was directed to be listed after two weeks.

Court's Reasoning and Analysis

The Court’s analysis is pragmatic and focused on ensuring it receives complete and standardized information necessary for effective oversight of cases against MLAs and MPs and for considering the establishment of Special Courts. The Amicus Curiae expressly stated that insufficient information from High Courts prevented him from assisting the Court. To remedy this deficiency:

The Court reviewed the data-collection format proposed by the Amicus Curiae and other counsel and identified a gap: the absence of a field specifying the expected time for completion of trials. The Court therefore mandated inclusion of “expected time of completion of trial” as Column No. 13, indicating the Court’s emphasis on timelines and case-flow management.

To operationalize the collection process, the Court directed immediate circulation of the standardized format to all High Courts through their Registrar Generals and set a preferred two-week timeframe for responses. It specified delivery in both hard and soft copies to the Amicus Curiae, with a copy to the Secretary General, ensuring centralized receipt and accountability.

Recognizing the need for state-specific monitoring, the Court required Bihar and Kerala to provide additional, granular post-order metrics tied to the Court’s earlier order dated 4-12-2018 in WP(C) No. 699 of 2016. The requested data points (decisions rendered, evidence recorded, charges framed, progress reports per paragraph 7 of the earlier order and any administrative directions, and comparative disposal rates before and after that order) reflect the Court’s effort to assess progress and effectiveness over time.

Procedurally, the Court allowed Interlocutory Application No. 71929 of 2019 for impleadment upon the request of Mr. Sanjay R. Hegde, thereby permitting participation of the applicant in the ongoing proceedings.

The matter was listed after two weeks, aligning with the timeline set for High Courts to furnish the required information.

Holding and Implications

Holding: The Court issued directions to standardize and expedite information gathering from all High Courts concerning cases against MLAs and MPs, including the addition of Column No. 13 for “expected time of completion of trial,” mandated submission of data within two weeks to the Amicus Curiae (with a copy to the Secretary General), required Bihar and Kerala to provide specific post-4-12-2018 status metrics and reports, allowed Interlocutory Application No. 71929 of 2019 for impleadment, and scheduled the matter for listing after two weeks.

Implications: The immediate effect is improved, time-bound, and standardized data collection to assist the Court and the Amicus Curiae in monitoring the progress of cases against MLAs and MPs and in addressing issues related to the establishment of Special Courts. The order is procedural and does not announce any new substantive legal rule or precedent; its consequences are primarily administrative and case-management oriented.

Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay Petitioner(s) v. Union Of India And Another (s).

1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties.

2. It was brought to the notice of this Court by the counsel appearing on behalf of Amicus Curiae that because of insufficient information furnished by the different High Courts about the cases pending against MLAs and MPs including former and sitting, he is unable to assist the Court about the establishment of the Special Courts.

3. Under the circumstances, a format for seeking the above information from the High Courts, was proposed by the Amicus Curiae and the other learned Senior counsel/learned counsel appearing for the parties, which is placed before us today.

4. We have perused the format and, in our view, one more column is required to be added, i.e., expected time of completion of trial in the matter as Column No. 13.

5. We direct that the said format be sent to the Registrar Generals of all the High Courts forthwith by an e.mail, and on receipt of the said format, the Registrar Generals of the High Courts are directed to furnish the information in the said format to the learned amicus, by sending both a hard copy and a soft copy by email at amicus.vijayhansaria@gmail.com. expeditiously and preferably within a period of two weeks from today. A copy of the same is also to be sent to the Secretary General of this Court.

6. So far as the States of Bihar and Kerala are concerned, they are directed to furnish the following additional information regarding the status of the cases after the order of this Court dated 4-12-2018 WP(C) No. 699 of 2016, i.e., (a) number of cases decided; (b) number of cases in which evidence is recorded, (c) number of cases in which charges have been framed and (d) progress reports of cases in terms of para 7 of the order and administrative direction, if any, issued by the two High Courts in this regard, and (e) disposal rates of such cases prior to the Order dated 4-12-2018 WP(C) No. 699 of 2016 and after the said order.

7. As prayed by Mr. Sanjay R. Hegde, learned Senior counsel, Interlocutory Application No. 71929 of 2019 seeking impleadment is allowed.

8. List the matter after two weeks.

Writ Petition (Civil) No. 699/2016

Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay Petitioner(s) v. Union Of India And Another (s).

Factual and Procedural Background

Legal Issues Presented

Arguments of the Parties

Table of Precedents Cited

Court's Reasoning and Analysis

Holding and Implications

Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay Petitioner(s) v. Union Of India And Another (s).

Comments