The Supreme Court said petitions under the anti-defection law must be decided expeditiously, regardless of the remaining tenure of an assembly.
A bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant directed the Madhya Pradesh Assembly Speaker to decide the plea against Congress MLA Nirmala Sapre within two months.
The court was hearing a petition filed by Madhya Pradesh Leader of Opposition Umang Singhar over the pending disqualification plea.
On Wednesday, the Supreme Court said anti-defection petitions must be decided without delay, Hindustan Times reported. It held that a high court cannot decline to direct an assembly speaker to act just because the House still has a long tenure ahead. The court also told the Madhya Pradesh assembly speaker to rule on a disqualification plea against Congress MLA Nirmala Sapre within two months.
The bench ruled that even if a high court sees no urgency in a disqualification case, matters under the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution still require prompt disposal. It held that such petitions cannot be left pending on the ground that the assembly has substantial time left in its term.
The bench comprised Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana. It was hearing a petition by Madhya Pradesh Leader of Opposition Umang Singhar, who complained that a plea seeking Sapre’s disqualification had remained pending before the speaker since June 2024.
Speaker Deadline Set
The court made its position clear. “Even in a case where the court finds that there is no urgency, issues like these should be dealt with expeditiously,” the bench held in its order, according to the repor.
The court said petitions under the Tenth Schedule must move fast and referred to Padi Kaushik Reddy Vs State of Telangana (2025) and Keisham Meghachandra Singh Vs Speaker, Manipur Legislative Assembly (2021). In Padi Kaushik Reddy, it ordered the Telangana speaker to decide disqualification pleas against 10 MLAs within three months. In Keisham Meghachandra Singh, it said three months should normally be the outer limit unless exceptional circumstances exist.
The bench had first proposed a three-month deadline for the Madhya Pradesh speaker. It later cut that to two months after senior advocate Vivek Tankha, appearing for Singhar, requested a shorter period. Tankha told the court, “Two and a half years have gone. Another two years of the assembly’s term remain.” He also said the matter had been kept for orders before the high court, notice was then issued, and the speaker had reserved the disqualification proceedings for orders without a final decision.
Sapre Dispute Background
The case turns on whether Sapre gave up her party. “What we find from the record is that there are allegations against respondent no. 4 (MLA Nirmala Sapre) of voluntarily giving up membership of the party on whose ticket she was declared elected. On this premise, it is alleged that respondent no. 4 has incurred disqualification under the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution,” the bench said in its order.
The petition was filed by Singhar. It alleged that Sapre, elected from the Bina constituency on a Congress ticket in the 2023 assembly elections, had voluntarily given up her party membership and aligned herself with the BJP without resigning as an MLA. The allegations included her appearance on stage at a programme attended by Chief Minister Mohan Yadav in Rahatgarh on May 5, 2024 during the Lok Sabha election campaign. An application seeking action against Sapre under the anti-defection law was moved before the speaker on June 30, 2024.
Sapre denied the charge. She maintained that she had resigned from the Congress but had not joined the BJP and described the allegations as baseless. The Madhya Pradesh High Court in June this year declined to direct the speaker to speed up the case, citing the lack of extraordinary circumstances and the fact that the assembly still had two years left in its tenure.
The high court also recorded that the speaker had taken statements from the parties and that the proceedings had made substantial progress. It said no documents had been placed on record to show that Sapre had been expelled from the Congress or admitted to the BJP. The high court concluded that, in the absence of such material and any “demonstrated urgency”, it was not appropriate to issue a direction to the speaker to decide the disqualification petition expeditiously.
