New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Wednesday refused to entertain the Centres plea seeking a review of its verdict on disqualification of MPs and MLAs on being convicted in a criminal case.
The apex court, however, agreed to hear the Centres petition seeking review of its judgment barring arrested persons from contesting elections.
All political parties had backed the governments decision to challenge the verdict.
Currently, a lawmaker who is convicted does not have to quit office if an appeal is pending in a higher court. The appeal has to be filed within three months of conviction. The Supreme Court cancelled that provision in its July decision.
The government, in consultation with the Opposition, brought a Bill that said convicted lawmakers can stay, but without voting rights.
Referring to the Bill, the top court today said: “You have almost accepted our order. There is no error of law.”
However, the judges have agreed to review another part of the judgement that banned an arrested politician from running for office.
Parties had argued that this would lead to leaders being jailed by those in power as a course of political vendetta to prevent them from contesting elections. A Bill to negate the order was passed in the Rajya Sabha in this session, and is pending in the Lok Sabha.
The amendment to the RP Act shall come into effect from July 10, 2013, the day the Supreme Court gave the landmark judgment which was seen as a big step towards cleaning up the political system.
At an all-party meeting, political parties across the board opposed the apex court order, arguing it could be misused to settle scores. Political parties voiced concerns about “judicial overreach” and argued that the supremacy of Parliament must be maintained and if required, amendments must be brought in the Constitution.