Karnataka MLA Disqualification case: Live Updates from the Supreme Court

The hearing in the plea recently filed by 17 MLAs from Karnataka challenging their disqualification from the state assembly is presently underway before the Supreme Court of India..The Supreme Court issued notice in the petitions in September this year. The hearing in the matter is presently ongoing before a Bench comprising of Justices NV Ramana, Sanjiv Khanna and Krishna Murari..During Wednesday’s hearing, Senior Advocates Mukul Rohatgi, Aryama Sundaram, AK Ganguli and KV Viswanathan made arguments for the disqualified MLAs. Read an account of the hearing here..Senior Advocates Sajan Poovayya and V Giri made arguments for some of the disqualified MLAs yesterday. Following this, Senior Advocate Rajeev Dhavan made arguments for the respondent side as well. Read and account of yesterday’s hearing here. .Live updates from today’s hearing follow:.Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal making submissions..My submission is that since these are matters within the house, the Speaker alone can decide on it and nobody else. My Lords cannot decide on what happened within the House, Sibal.Kapil Sibal is currently arguing on why the matter should be heard by a Constitution Bench. “I am not on the facts (of the case). I am arguing on why matter should be heard by a Constitution Bench”, Sibal.What is the meaning of all this if he a legislator disqualified but he is allowed to fight the election? If that is allowed it gives impetus to such conduct as in this case, Sibal.Let the elections go on. Who is saying elections should not be held? Constitutionally, the two issues (of disqualification and holding elections) should not be co-related. Elections should not be postponed simply because they want to contest, Sibal.Eleven people decide to put in their resignation on the same day. When a Speaker comes to know of it, how would he react? Any Speaker would be put on notice and would naturally inquire into why 11 MLAs are resigning suddenly, Sibal.Can the Speaker go to the extent of protecting govt., asks Justice NV Ramana.Speaker is supposed to be neutral, weighs in Justice Sanjiv Khanna; “I will come to this (later)”, responds Sibal.The next day they go to the Governor. Why should they go to the Governor, asks Sibal.Even if a seven days notice is not given, procedure is not vitiated, Kapil Sibal.What is their fundamental right to come to Supreme Court, asks Sibal.My submission is right to be elected is a statutory right. Hence, they cannot come to Supreme Court, Kapil Sibal.Kapil Sibal concludes. .Senior Devadatt Kamat makes submissions.Following this, Senior Advocate Aryama Sundaram commences arguments..Aryama Sundaram submits that there is an error in certain facts stated by respondents.I did not attend a legislative committee meeting of the party but it was not a Whip. So how can I be disqualified, Sundaram asks.The finding against me is not under paragraph 2(1)(b) of Tenth Schedule, Sundaram.So whether my not attending the meeting amounts to me leaving the party under para 2(1)(a) of Tenth Schedule, Sundaram.I had resigned by then. Am I expected to attend the House after I tendered my resignation, Sundaram..Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi makes submissions.Resignation and Disqualification are distinct and different proceedings; They are mixing up the reasons for the two which cannot be done, Mukul Rohatgi.Motive for resignation is irrelevant when Speaker has to consider the resignation letters, Rohatgi..Supreme Court reserves judgment..In July this year, petitions were filed by 17 ex-MLAs of Karnataka challenging their disqualification by the previous Speaker of the Assembly. The resignation of the 17 MLAs from the Congress and JD(S) parties eventually brought down the HD Kumaraswamy-led regime in Karnataka in July this year. They were thereafter disqualified on grounds of defection by former Speaker, KR Ramesh..Bar & Bench is available on WhatsApp. For real-time updates on stories, Click here to subscribe to our WhatsApp.