Skip to content
Sunday, 15 November 2026Delhi 25°C · Mumbai 34°C · Kolkata 29°C · Chennai 29°C · Bengaluru 28°C · Lucknow 29°C
Independent news and guest opinion
for everyday India
Breaking
Legal

Special MP/MLA Courts Can Try Offences Committed Before the Accused Became a Legislator: Karnataka HC

Justice M. Nagaprasanna quashed a magistrate’s cognizance against MLA B.M. Farooq and sent the case to the special court.

Attara Kacheri, home of the High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru
Photo: Attara Kacheri, housing the High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru, India by N. Vivekananthamoorthy, CC BY-SA 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons

The Karnataka High Court has held that the special courts set up for cases against MPs and MLAs can try sitting and former legislators even for offences allegedly committed before they were elected, LiveLaw reported on 14 November.

The case

Justice M. Nagaprasanna was hearing a petition by B.M. Farooq, who faced a case before the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC at Chikkanayakanahalli in Tumakuru district. The complaint, filed by V. Selvaraj, invokes IPC Sections 409, 420, 461, 468, 471 and 120B. Police had filed a “B” report seeking closure. After a protest petition, the magistrate took cognizance on 4 May 2023 and issued process on 29 May 2024. Farooq was elected to the Karnataka Legislative Assembly in the meantime.

Arguments

Senior Advocate M. Aruna Shyam, for Farooq, argued that the regular magistrate had no jurisdiction because a special court exists for cases against people’s representatives, and asked for a transfer. The State Public Prosecutor opposed the petition on merits but accepted that earlier High Court rulings send such cases to the special court.

What the court held

Relying on Dr. K. Sudhakar v. State of Karnataka and Dr. Y. Ramappa v. State of Karnataka, the court said a special court’s jurisdiction does not turn on whether the accused held office when the offence was allegedly committed. The aim of these courts, it said, is the “expeditious disposal of such cases”. Cognizance by the regular magistrate was therefore a jurisdictional error.

The petition was allowed. The proceedings before the magistrate were quashed and the matter was sent to the designated special court for MPs and MLAs, which is free to pass fresh orders. The complaint and the investigation remain alive.

— Legal Desk

Featured image: Attara Kacheri, housing the High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru, India by N. Vivekananthamoorthy, CC BY-SA 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons.

Sources

Share this story

Related

Join the discussion

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *