New Delhi, August 18: Supreme Court Justice V Mohana on Tuesday recused herself from hearing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking measures to ensure the speedy disposal of criminal cases pending against Members of Parliament (MPs) and Members of Legislative Assemblies (MLAs).

The matter was heard by a bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana. At the outset, the CJI noted that Justice Mohana had previously appeared as a lawyer in the case.

“My sister will recuse. We will list it before another bench,” the CJI said.

Senior advocate Vijay Hansaria, who is assisting the Supreme Court as amicus curiae, urged the court to list the matter before another bench at the earliest, emphasising the need for an urgent hearing.

Hansaria’s latest report on the criminalisation of politics has highlighted that 251 of the 543 Lok Sabha members and 75 of the 233 Rajya Sabha members have criminal cases pending against them.

An affidavit filed by Hansaria in the 2016 PIL initiated by lawyer Ashwini Upadhyay stated that more than 4,000 criminal cases were pending against MPs and MLAs across the country. The affidavit also noted that 14 of the 28 Chief Ministers had declared criminal cases against themselves, including cases involving serious offences.

Among the Chief Ministers, Telangana Chief Minister Anumula Revanth Reddy has declared the highest number of cases at 89, followed by West Bengal Chief Minister Suvendu Adhikari with 29 and Karnataka Chief Minister D K Shivakumar with 19.

Hansaria has pointed out that despite continued monitoring by the Supreme Court and various High Courts to facilitate speedy trials, the number of pending criminal cases against lawmakers has remained largely unchanged since 2018.

In its November 9, 2023 judgment, the Supreme Court issued a series of directions aimed at expediting the trial of more than 5,000 criminal cases involving MPs and MLAs. The court directed High Courts to constitute special benches to monitor such cases and ensure their timely disposal.

The apex court also directed special courts handling cases against lawmakers to avoid granting adjournments except for “rare and compelling reasons”. It further instructed High Courts, district courts and designated special courts to accord priority to criminal proceedings involving MPs, MLAs and members of legislative councils.