Supreme Court Rebukes Telangana CM Over Remarks on Bye-Polls
The Supreme Court has issued a stern warning to Telangana Chief Minister A. Revanth Reddy over a controversial statement made on the floor of the state Assembly. Reddy had claimed that no bye-elections would be held even if MLAs from the Bharat Rashtra Samithi (BRS) defected to the ruling Congress party, a remark the apex court said undermines the constitutional provisions meant to prevent political defections.
Supreme Court Rebuke
Taking serious note of the chief minister’s statement, the bench of Justices B.R. Gavai and A.G. Masih observed that such a claim from the leader of a state government amounted to making a “mockery of the Tenth Schedule” of the Constitution. The court reminded that statements made inside the legislative assembly carry weight and should not be used to project intentions that bypass constitutional safeguards.
The bench made these observations while hearing a petition concerning delays in the adjudication of disqualification pleas against defected BRS MLAs. The court warned that any attempt to trivialize or bypass the legal process under the anti-defection law would be viewed with the utmost seriousness.
Controversial Statement by CM
The issue arose when the Chief Minister was quoted assuring the House that no bye-polls would be necessary even if BRS legislators shifted loyalties to the Congress. The remark was flagged by legal representatives arguing that such assertions directly contradict the spirit of the anti-defection provisions. These laws exist to preserve the integrity of democratic institutions by discouraging opportunistic political switching.
Bye-Poll Controversy
The court stopped short of initiating contempt proceedings but left no doubt about its disapproval. It emphasized that while restraint is exercised in such matters, the judiciary would not hesitate to act if constitutional principles are blatantly violated. The warning stands as a reminder that elected leaders must respect not only the letter but also the spirit of the Constitution.
This development signals the judiciary’s vigilance in ensuring the sanctity of democratic processes and sends a clear message that legislative forums should not be used to signal disregard for constitutional accountability.
