No separate trial of Haryana Cong MLA in Nuh violence case

The Supreme Court has quashed the Punjab and Haryana High Court's order directing a separate trial for Haryana Congress MLA Mamman Khan in the July 2023 Nuh communal violence case solely on the ground of his being a legislator.

“The right to equal access to justice is an essential facet of the rule of law, and no person — whether a sitting MLA or an ordinary citizen — can be subjected to procedural disadvantage or preferential treatment without express legal justification,” the top court said.

“While expeditious disposal of cases involving legislators is undoubtedly desirable, such administrative prioritisation cannot override the procedural safeguards guaranteed under the CrPC or the constitutional mandate of equality. Segregating the appellant's trial solely on account of his political office, in the absence of any legal or factual necessity, amounts to arbitrary classification and undermines the integrity of the criminal justice process,” a Bench of Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice R Mahadevan said.

Acting on Khan’s petition, the top court set aside the high court's December 12, 2024, order upholding the trial court's orders issued on August 28, 2024, and September 2, 2024, for conducting a separate trial against him in the Nuh violence case in which six persons were reportedly killed.

Khan and other co-accused had been booked for allegedly instigating the violence arising out of the same incident.

“The direction to file a separate chargesheet against the appellant (Khan) and the consequential segregation of his trial from that of the co-accused are quashed,” it ordered on September 12.

“We also find that the trial court exceeded its jurisdiction in directing the police to file a separate chargesheet against the appellant. The discretion to file a chargesheet lies solely with the investigating agency. Even where multiple chargesheets are filed, if the offences arise out of the same transaction, they must be tried together,” it said.

“Most importantly, the appellant’s status as a sitting MLA cannot, by itself, justify a separate trial. All accused stand equal before the law, and preferential segregation militates against the equality principle enshrined in Article 14 (right to equality),” the Bench said.

While the right to a speedy trial was an essential facet of Article 21 (right to life and liberty), it cannot be secured at the cost of fairness and by compromising the fundamental rights of the accused, the top court said, sending the matter back to the trial court with a direction to conduct a joint trial of Khan along with the co-accused, in accordance with the law.

“The trial court shall be at liberty to regulate the schedule of proceedings to ensure expeditious disposal but shall do so without compromising procedural safeguards and only after hearing all parties concerned,” it said.