'Judicial System Often Grapples With Suspected Political Influence': Supreme Court

A Supreme Court bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath and Satish Chandra Sharma set aside the trial court’s order, which allowed the withdrawal of prosecution of Chhote Singh since he got elected as a ruling party MLA from Uttar Pradesh in 2007 in a 1994 double murder case. Singh a former BSP MLA, is currently with the BJP.

New Delhi:The Supreme Court has said that the judicial system often grapples with the pervasive issues of prolonged delay and suspected political influence within the legal proceedings and stressed that because an accused in a double murder case, who has been elected as an MLA, cannot be a testament to his good image in the general public.

The top court said this case presents concerning circumstances wherein politically influential individuals, accused of a double murder in broad daylight, have evaded trial for almost three decades.

A bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath and Satish Chandra Sharma said that matters of a gruesome crime akin to the double murder in the present case do not warrant withdrawal of prosecution merely on the ground of good public image of an accused named in the charge sheet after thorough investigation.

"Contrary to the trial court's view, such withdrawal cannot be said to be allowed in the public interest. This reasoning cannot be accepted especially in cases of involvement of influential people”, said the bench.

The bench said the trial court in passing the order on May 19, 2012, adopted a casual approach by allowing withdrawal of prosecution. The apex court made this observation while setting aside the trial court’s order, which allowed the withdrawal of prosecution of Chhote Singh, since he got elected as a ruling party MLA from Uttar Pradesh in 2007 in a 1994 double murder case. Singh a former BSP MLA, is currently with the BJP.

"Considering the material on record and the political influence of accused Chhote Singh and the trial court’s casual approach towards the accusations against the then sitting Member of Legislative Assembly in allowing withdrawal of his prosecution, this court is of the opinion that merely because an accused person is elected to the Legislative Assembly cannot be a testament to their image among the general public”, said the bench, in its judgment delivered on July 15.

The bench said the present case highlights the alarming trend where cases, particularly those involving influential figures, face significant delays, obstructing the administration of justice.

"The undue influence wielded by powerful individuals further exacerbates the situation, raising concerns about fairness and impartiality. This underscores the urgent need to address systemic flaws and ensure timely resolution of legal disputes," said the bench.

The apex court delivered its verdict on a plea filed by Shailendra Kumar Srivastava, son of one of the deceased. Srivastava moved the apex court aggrieved with Allahabad High Court's repeated adjournment in the 2012 criminal revision petition. The petitioner had moved the High Court against the order allowing the withdrawal of prosecution.

Justice Nath, who delivered the judgment on behalf of the bench, said the High Court in repeatedly allowing the adjournment requests has only allowed the accused persons to deploy dilatory tactics to delay their trial and have failed to ensure that the justice system is set in motion and is not halted due to the lamentable specter of political influence.

The bench examined the matter on merits in relation with the application under Section 321 of the CrPC, instead of sending it back to the High Court. "While the other nine accused were put to trial and their applications rejected without a reasoned order, this order being challenged by both, accused persons and the victims, has remained pending before the High Court for twelve years and the resultant stagnation in trial proceedings is deeply troubling. Given the gravity of the situation and the risk of miscarriage of justice, urgent action is warranted," said the bench.

The apex court asked the High Court to promptly decide the pending applications by the remaining nine accused, who sought parity with the ex-MLA, to ensure that justice is not further delayed or compromised.