Data in SC: 122 ED cases, 121 CBI cases pending against sitting, former legislators

Part of a report submitted to the top court by Senior Advocate Vijay Hansaria, the amicus curiae in the matter regarding setting up of special courts to fast track cases against sitting and former legislators, the data includes cases pending with the CBI as well.

SITTING AND former legislators are involved in 122 cases arising out of offences under Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 and are being probed by Enforcement Directorate (ED), according to data presented to Supreme Court on Tuesday.

They include 51 sitting and former MPs and 71 sitting and former MLAs and MLCs.

Part of a report submitted to the top court by Senior Advocate Vijay Hansaria, the amicus curiae in the matter regarding setting up of special courts to fast track cases against sitting and former legislators, the data includes cases pending with the CBI as well.

According to the report, there are 121 CBI cases against 51 sitting and former MPs and 112 sitting and former MLAs, indicating involvement of more than one legislator in a case. Of these, 58 are punishable with life imprisonment. In 45 of the cases, charges have not been framed yet, although the offences were alleged to have been committed several years ago, the report said.

The figures were culled out by the amicus curiae and Advocate Sneha Kalita from reports submitted by the Centre and various High Courts.

The report pointed out some instances of inordinate delay in the trial of ED cases and said the Special Court in Delhi in yet to even take cognizance of prosecution in two complaints filed in June 2018 and October 2018.

It urged the court to direct trial courts to expedite the pending cases on day-to-day basis and to ask High Courts to issue administrative instructions to courts dealing with the CBI and ED cases involving legislators on a priority basis. It also sought setting up of additional special courts and a monitoring committee for cases in which investigation is still pending to evaluate the reasons for the delay and to issue appropriate directions to the concerned Investigating Officer.

Source: Read Full Article