FIR against M.P. Governor quashed

May 06, 2015 12:00 am | Updated 05:48 am IST - Jabalpur:

Ram Naresh Yadav was said to be involved in an exam recruitment scam.

Ram Naresh Yadav was said to be involved in an exam recruitment scam.

In a major relief for Madhya Pradesh Governor Ram Naresh Yadav, the High Court on Tuesday quashed the FIR filed against him in connection with the MP Professional Examination Board (MPPEB) scam, holding he enjoyed immunity while in office.

A Division Bench of the High Court comprising Chief Justice A.M. Khanwilkar and Justice Rohit Arya while setting aside the FIR against 88-year-old Yadav, however, said the police were at liberty to proceed against him once he ceases to be the Governor.

Extent of immunity

“While dealing with the primary question of extent of immunity and privilege extended to the Head of a State, during his term of office, which answers the jurisdictional fact, we proceed to quash the impugned FIR against the petitioner [Governor] on that count alone, with liberty to police to proceed in accordance with law, after the petitioner ceases to be the Governor,” the Bench observed.

Earlier on April 18, the High Court had in an interim order stayed the FIR filed on February 24 against the Governor by the Special Task Force (STF) in connection with the recruitment scam, asking the prosecuting agency not to take any “coercive action” against him.

The STF had filed the FIR against Mr. Yadav, possibly the first against any Governor of Madhya Pradesh, alleging his complicity in the forest guard recruitment scam.

Thereafter, Mr. Yadav had petitioned the High Court.

“For, the immunity and privilege is only during the term of office. At the same time the immunity and privilege extended to the Governor will not impair or whittle down the powers of the police to investigate the criminal case registered against other accused who cannot claim such privilege and in the process, record statement of the petitioner, if required,” the judges further observed.

Police power not impaired

“We say so because the immunity in Article 361 (2) or 361 (3) does not extend to recording of statement of the Head of a State by the police in connection with investigation of a crime, if it is so essential.

“The police, however, must take all salutary precautions and observe circumspection while recording statement of the petitioner in the course of investigation, so that the majesty of the office of the Governor of the State is not undermined in any manner,” the court ruled.

Mr. Yadav’s counsel Ram Jethmalani, Adarsh Muni Trivedi and Mahendra Pateria had contended in the court that criminal proceedings against the Governor were contrary to provisions of Article 361 (2) and (3) of the Constitution, which grant immunity to the President and Governors while in office.

However, the STF had argued that criminal proceedings are not launched with the registration of the case but only after a charge sheet is put up in court.

On the other hand, the Governor’s counsel had argued that criminal proceedings start with registration of an FIR. — PTI

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.