The Supreme Court today declined to look into the expulsion of Trinamool Congress leader Mahua Moitra from the Lok Sabha, in a setback to the leader who faces cash-for-query allegations linked to businessman Darshan Hiranandani.
Though the Supreme Court did not dismiss Ms Moitra’s challenge against her expulsion from parliament, the court said it will first determine whether it has jurisdiction to hear the matter.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Lok Sabha Secretary General, said the Supreme Court should not interfere in decisions taken inside parliament, since parliament has its own sovereignty and is one of the three organs under the Constitution, and parliament can internally manage disciplinary issues of its members through its in-house procedure which is not amenable to judicial review.
“If we have the power of judicial review, we will investigate,” the Supreme Court said.
Ms Moitra will also get three weeks to reply. The hearing will begin from March 11 in the Supreme Court again.
At the moment, Ms Moitra remains expelled from the Lok Sabha and can’t participate in the proceedings.
The Supreme Court said for now it won’t comment on the merits of the issues raised by Ms Moitra in the challenge to her expulsion, but has kept the case open.
“Do you admit that you shared OTP with Hiranandani?” the Supreme Court said in the hearing today.
“All MPs do this with their secretaries,” senior lawyer Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for Ms Moitra, told the court.
The Supreme Court declined Ms Moitra’s request for an early hearing citing the Budget session, due next month.
Ms Moitra, 49, was accused of taking bribes, including Rs 2 crore in cash and “luxury gift items”, from Mr Hiranandani in exchange for asking questions critical of the government in parliament. She was also accused of surrendering log-in credentials to a confidential account on the parliamentary website, so Mr Hiranandani could post those questions directly.
Ms Moitra denied the bribery charges but admitted to sharing the login details. She argued that sharing of these details is common practice among MPs.
