For this article:

17 Jan 2026·Source: The Hindu
3 min
Polity & GovernanceScience & TechnologyNEWS

Supreme Court Stays Mukul Roy's Disqualification from Bengal Assembly

SC stays Mukul Roy's disqualification, questions AI's role in defection cases.

The Supreme Court has stayed the Calcutta High Court's order disqualifying politician Mukul Roy from the West Bengal Legislative Assembly for defecting to the Trinamool Congress. Chief Justice of India Surya Kant questioned the use of AI in defection cases, noting that anyone's face can be used in a video. The court agreed with the submission that Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, which provides the legal framework for authenticating electronic evidence, was not complied with. The Speaker had rejected the disqualification petition due to the production of only screenshots from social media platforms. The High Court had used the principle of 'preponderance of probability' to decide the defection case.

Key Facts

1.

SC stays Mukul Roy's disqualification

2.

Disqualification by: Calcutta High Court

3.

Reason: Defection to Trinamool Congress

4.

AI's role questioned in defection cases

UPSC Exam Angles

1.

GS Paper 2: Parliament and State Legislatures – structure, functioning, conduct of business, powers & privileges and issues arising out of these.

2.

GS Paper 2: Salient features of the Representation of People's Act.

3.

Potential question types: Statement-based questions on the anti-defection law, its evolution, and related Supreme Court judgments.

Visual Insights

Timeline of Mukul Roy's Defection Case

This timeline outlines the key events in Mukul Roy's defection case, highlighting the legal challenges and the Supreme Court's intervention.

The case highlights the complexities of the Anti-Defection Law and the challenges in proving defection based on circumstantial evidence, especially in the age of digital media.

  • 2017Mukul Roy leaves Trinamool Congress (TMC)
  • 2017Joins Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)
  • 2021Wins West Bengal Assembly election on BJP ticket
  • 2021Rejoins Trinamool Congress (TMC) shortly after election
  • 2021Disqualification petition filed against Mukul Roy
  • 2022Speaker rejects disqualification petition citing lack of evidence
  • 2024Calcutta High Court orders Mukul Roy's disqualification
  • 2026Supreme Court stays Calcutta High Court's disqualification order
More Information

Background

The anti-defection law in India emerged from the political instability caused by frequent floor-crossing after the 1967 general elections. The initial attempts to curb defections were made through non-binding resolutions and committees. However, these proved ineffective.

The Tenth Schedule was inserted into the Constitution in 1985 through the 52nd Amendment Act to specifically address the issue. This schedule laid down the process by which legislators could be disqualified for defection on grounds of switching parties. The law has been amended since, with interpretations and rulings by the Supreme Court shaping its application and scope.

The objective was to provide stability to governments and uphold the mandate of the electorate.

Latest Developments

Recent years have seen increased scrutiny of the anti-defection law's effectiveness, particularly concerning its impact on legislative independence and the role of the Speaker in deciding disqualification petitions. There's ongoing debate about whether the Speaker's role should be transferred to an independent tribunal to ensure impartiality. The use of technology and digital evidence in defection cases has also become a focal point, raising questions about authenticity and admissibility.

The Supreme Court's intervention in cases like Mukul Roy's highlights the judiciary's role in interpreting and upholding the constitutional principles underlying the anti-defection law. Future developments may involve further amendments to the law or clearer guidelines on the use of digital evidence.

Practice Questions (MCQs)

1. Which of the following statements is/are correct regarding the Tenth Schedule of the Indian Constitution? 1. It was inserted by the 42nd Amendment Act of 1976. 2. It provides for the disqualification of Members of Parliament and state legislatures on grounds of defection. 3. The decision of the Speaker/Chairman in this regard is final and not subject to judicial review.

  • A.1 and 2 only
  • B.2 only
  • C.1 and 3 only
  • D.1, 2 and 3
Show Answer

Answer: B

Statement 1 is incorrect as the Tenth Schedule was inserted by the 52nd Amendment Act of 1985. Statement 3 is incorrect as the decision of the Speaker/Chairman is subject to judicial review as per the Kihoto Hollohan case.

2. Consider the following statements regarding Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act: 1. It deals with the admissibility of electronic records as evidence. 2. It mandates the submission of a certificate to authenticate electronic evidence. 3. Non-compliance with Section 65B automatically renders electronic evidence inadmissible.

  • A.1 and 2 only
  • B.2 and 3 only
  • C.1 and 3 only
  • D.1, 2 and 3
Show Answer

Answer: D

All three statements are correct. Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act outlines the conditions for the admissibility of electronic records, including the requirement of a certificate. Non-compliance generally makes the evidence inadmissible, although courts have sometimes allowed exceptions.

3. In the context of disqualification of legislators on grounds of defection, the 'preponderance of probability' standard is often used. Which of the following best describes this standard?

  • A.Proof beyond a reasonable doubt, as required in criminal cases.
  • B.A higher standard of proof than 'balance of probabilities', requiring near certainty.
  • C.A standard where the evidence suggests that it is more likely than not that a particular fact is true.
  • D.A standard that requires absolute certainty and irrefutable evidence.
  • E.E) A standard that requires absolute certainty and irrefutable evidence.
Show Answer

Answer: C

The 'preponderance of probability' standard means that the evidence suggests it is more likely than not that a particular fact is true. It is a lower standard than 'proof beyond a reasonable doubt'.

4. Assertion (A): The Supreme Court has expressed concerns about the use of AI-generated evidence in defection cases. Reason (R): AI can be used to manipulate videos and create false impressions, making it difficult to ascertain the truth.

  • A.Both A and R are true, and R is the correct explanation of A.
  • B.Both A and R are true, but R is NOT the correct explanation of A.
  • C.A is true, but R is false.
  • D.A is false, but R is true.
Show Answer

Answer: A

Both the assertion and the reason are true, and the reason correctly explains why the Supreme Court is concerned about AI-generated evidence. The potential for manipulation makes it difficult to rely on such evidence.

GKSolverToday's News