Expressing concern over the criminalisation of politics, the Supreme Court on Wednesday advised the Prime Minister and State Chief Ministers not to induct persons against whom charges were framed or those facing trial for offences involving moral turpitude as ministers.
The court, however, made it clear that there was no limitation or restriction in the Constitution that debars any Member of Parliament or Legislative Assembly facing criminal charges from being included in the Cabinet.
A five-judge Constitution Bench, comprising Chief Justice of India RM Lodha and Justices Dipak Misra, Madan B Lokur, Kurian Joseph and SA Bobde, in three concurring judgments, said: “The repose of faith in the Prime Minister by the entire nation under the Constitution has expectations of good governance, which is carried on by Ministers of his choice. It is also expected that the persons who are chosen as ministers do not have criminal antecedents, especially facing trial in respect of serious or heinous criminal offences or offences pertaining to corruption.”
Writing the main judgment, Justice Misra said: “Criminalisation of politics is anathema to the sacredness of democracy. It is worth saying that systemic corruption and sponsored criminalisation can corrode the fundamental core of elective democracy and, consequently, constitutional governance.”
The Bench was disposing of public interest litigation filed in 2005 by Manoj Narula seeking removal of four cabinet ministers chargesheeted then: Lalu Prasad, Mohammed Taslimuddin, MAA Fatmi and Jai Prakash Yadav.
Leader’s prerogative The Bench refused to add a new disqualification for appointment of ministers as it was the prerogative of the prime minister or the chief minister of a State to appoint ministers of his/her choice. It said: “We are of the convinced opinion that when there is no disqualification for a person against whom charges have been framed in respect of heinous or serious offences or offences relating to corruption to contest the election, by interpretative process, it is difficult to read the prohibition into Article 75(1) or, for that matter, into Article 164(1) to the powers of the Prime Minister or the Chief Minister in such a manner.”
Justice Lokur said: “The time has come for Parliament to prescribe some qualifications for members of legislatures as has been prescribed in any other field.”