On August 22, the Supreme Court of India set aside the Kerala High Court’s January 25 order suspending the NCP MP Mohd Faizal’s conviction in an attempt to murder case. The Kerala High Court had observed that if Faizal’s conviction were not stayed then his Lok Sabha seat would be vacant and the polls would cost the exchequer. The apex court remitted the matter to the high court asking it to decide the matter afresh within six weeks. The court further allowed the benefit of suspension of conviction to remain in operation till the high court’s decision enabling Faizal to continue as an MP.
The Supreme Court’s Division Bench, comprising Justices BV Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan, reiterated its concerns expressed earlier during the July 17 hearing. The UT of Lakshadweep’s administration and the original complainant moved the petitions before the apex court, challenging the high court’s order suspending Faizal’s conviction. On July 17, the court expressed concerns over the high court’s reasoning to suspend Faizal’s conviction in lieu of incurring monetary loss while organising the administrative exercise.
“Because there is going to be a disqualification, we are going to suspend his conviction…That cannot be the reason,” Justice Nagarathna had said.
The court noted that the Kerala High Court “had not considered the true position of law with respect to the manner in which an application for a stay on conviction must be considered,” with the high court’s focus on expenses incurred in conducting elections for Faizal’s seat. The court said that election it should not have been the sole factor in suspending the conviction and that the high court ought to have considered the application from a proper perspective bearing in mind the apex court’s verdicts.
“On this short ground alone, we set aside the impugned order and remand the matter to the high court for reconsideration of the application seeking a suspension of conviction. However, we find that from the date of this order staying his conviction till date, the respondent has continued as a Member of Parliament and has, in that capacity, discharged all his duties. Since we are remanding the matter for reconsideration, at this stage, it would not be just and proper to create a vacuum, especially since we are requesting the high court to reconsider his application within a period of six weeks,” the court said while setting aside the high court’s order.
On January 25, the Kerala High Court suspended Faizal’s conviction and sentence for an attempt to murder after he challenged the trial court’s verdict convicting him u/s 143, 147, 148, 307, 324, 342, 448, 427, 506 read with 149 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) relating to offences relating to rioting, attempt to murder, violence and kidnapping. The trial court sentenced Faizal and three others to ten years of rigorous imprisonment on January 11.
“The societal interest in averting an expensive election that too, when the elected candidate can continue for a limited period alone if the fresh election is conducted, cannot be brushed aside by this court. The societal interest and the need to have purity in politics and elections will have to be balanced,” the Kerala High Court had said.
On March 29, the Supreme Court’s Division Bench, comprising Justices BV Nagarathna and KM Joseph, heard the pleas challenging the Kerala High Court’s order suspending Faizal’s conviction and said that there could not be a separate rule for an elected representative and common people for suspending conviction and sentence in a criminal case.
Furthermore, the apex court had stressed that the high court’s order requires a deeper examination taking into account the evidence and nature of injuries considering that the victim suffered 16 injuries including injuries from sharp-edged weapons and iron rods. Faizal and three other persons were convicted for attempting to murder Padanath Salih, the son-in-law of former Union minister and Congress leader PM Sayeed.
Comments