In a significant legal development, the Bombay High Court on Friday suspended the two-year jail sentence of former Maharashtra minister and Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) politician Manikrao Kokate. This decision comes in a three-decade-old case where he was convicted of cheating to secure a flat under the state's Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) quota. However, in a crucial move, the court refused to stay his conviction, a decision with immediate political ramifications.
The Court's Verdict and Its Implications
Justice R N Laddha, presiding over the case, suspended the sentence and granted bail to Kokate, noting that the politician had not misused his liberty while on bail during the trial and appeal. However, the judge explicitly declined to stay the conviction itself. Justice Laddha emphasized that "democracy requires probity in public life," a remark pointedly referencing Kokate's status as a minister.
This legal nuance is critical. The suspension of the sentence allows Kokate to remain out of jail while he pursues further appeals. The lack of a stay on his conviction, however, means the disqualification process under the Representation of the People Act is set in motion. According to a landmark 2013 Supreme Court ruling, disqualification for a sitting legislator takes effect immediately upon conviction.
A Timeline of Legal and Political Moves
The case has a long history, originating in 1995 when Kokate and his brother were accused of securing flats under the EWS quota by allegedly showing a lower income. A Nashik magistrate convicted them in February of this year. On February 20, a sessions court in Nashik upheld this conviction and the two-year sentence, though it acquitted him on two other charges.
Kokate moved swiftly, approaching the Bombay High Court on Wednesday, February 21. The political fallout was immediate. He was divested of his ministerial portfolios on the same day and formally resigned as a minister on Thursday, February 22. He was also admitted to Lilavati Hospital during this period.
Legal Arguments and the Road Ahead
During the hearing, Kokate's senior counsel, Ravi Kadam, argued vigorously that the conviction was based on "purely on conjectures and surmises." He contended that the trial court had wrongly placed the burden of proof on Kokate to demonstrate his income in 1989 was above Rs 30,000. Kadam also highlighted that the chargesheet did not allege any wrongful declaration at the time of the flat allotment in 1994.
Furthermore, Kadam presented an exceptional circumstance plea, arguing that without a stay on conviction, Kokate's constituency would remain unrepresented, warranting judicial relief. The prosecution, led by Public Prosecutor Mankuwar Deshmukh, and the complainant's counsel, Manoj Mohite, countered that the trial court's order was evidence-based. Mohite submitted that Kokate's family owned 25 acres of land when he applied for the EWS flat.
The High Court's order now places the ball in the court of Maharashtra Assembly Speaker Rahul Narwekar. Legislative officials confirmed they are awaiting a certified copy of the HC order to seek legal clarity on the distinction between a suspended sentence and an unstayed conviction before initiating any disqualification action. The Speaker has a fortnight to pass orders on Kokate's disqualification following the conviction.
With the Bombay High Court's door closed on a conviction stay, Kokate's legal team is now expected to approach the Supreme Court seeking comprehensive relief, aiming to overturn the conviction itself and avert disqualification.
