'Immediate disqualification unlikely': NCP minister Manikrao Kokate’s lawyer after court upholds 2-year jail term in EWS quota case

PUNE/NASHIK: A sessions court in Nashik on Tuesday confirmed and upheld the trial court's judgment of Feb 20 convicting and sentencing Maharashtra sports minister and NCP leader Manikrao Kokate and his brother, Vijay, to two years of rigorous imprisonment in the case of securing two flats in 1995 under the state's 10% quota for economically weaker section (EWS) by showing less income.

The judgment puts a question mark over Kokate's continuation as an MLA (he represents the Sinnar assembly constituency in rural Nashik) and as a minister in the State Cabinet. Under the Representation of the People Act, an MP or MLA attracts "immediate disqualification" if convicted and sentenced for two years or more of imprisonment, unless the conviction is stayed and the sentence is suspended.

The Nashik sessions court modified the trial court's order to the extend of setting aside two charges and also setting aside the directives to MHADA and deputy collector (ULC) to cancel the allotment of flats.

Asked if Kokate has been granted bail, public prosecutor Sudhir Kotwal, who represented the state in Nashik, told TOI that the matter must go to the high court.

When contacted, Maharashtra State Assembly Speaker Rahul Narwekar told TOI, "I haven't yet received the (Nashik) court order."

The Supreme Court had in 2013 clarified that the disqualification is immediate though there is a three-month deadline under the law to file an appeal against the conviction order. The disqualification only stands lifted once the high court stays the conviction, not just the sentence.

Prosecutor Kotwal said, "Under the prevailing law, Kokate's disqualification is certain unless he gets a suspension of his sentence and a stay on his conviction from the high court (HC). While this process may take eight to 10 days if his lawyers go for an urgent circulation of the matter, there is no bar on his disqualification in the intervening period."

However, Kokate's lawyer Avinash Bhide told TOI, "An immediate disqualification is unlikely as we have a month's time to secure a stay and suspension order from the HC. Even after that, the matter will go before the Speaker of the State Assembly."

Bhide said, "We will exercise the remedy of filing an appeal before the HC. Our legal team in Mumbai will decide on whether it should be in the form of a second appeal or a revision plea considering that we have exhausted the first appeal before the sessions court."

After the trial court's judgment, Kokate had secured bail to enable him to file an appeal before the sessions court and on March 5 secured a stay from the sessions court on his conviction and sentence till the pendency of his appeal. Now that the sessions court has confirmed his conviction and sentencing, Kokate has no such protection. "The sessions court in an appeal matter has no powers to grant bail once the trial court's conviction and sentence is confirmed. The matter has to go before the HC," prosecutor Kotwal said.

The court of district and sessions judge P M Badar partly modified the trial court's judgment by setting aside the Kokate brothers' conviction for offences under sections 467 (forgery of valuable instrument, will or authority) and 474 (possession of forged documents) read with 34 (common intention) of the IPC. The court set aside the trial court's direction to Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority (MHADA) and Deputy Collector (ULC) to cancel the allotment of flats to the Kokate brothers and restore possession as earlier.

The court, however, confirmed and upheld the sentences for offences under sections 420 (cheating), 465 (forgery), 468 (forgery for purpose of cheating) and 471 (fraudulent or dishonest use of forged document or electronic record as genuine) of the IPC.

Neither Kokate nor his brother was present in the sessions court on Tuesday when the judge read out the operative part of the order confirming the conviction and sentence. A full text of the judgment was expected to the released in due course of time.

Prosecutor Kotwal said, "Our case was that in 1989-90 when Kokate and his brother applied for the flats under the 10% EWS quota scheme, they showed their annual income at Rs25,000 each. Under the scheme, an applicant with Rs30,000 or less annual income is eligible for allotment of a flat."

"We brought to the court's notice that while allotting the two flats, the govt went by the affidavits relating to annual income claim and did not check any papers/documents. So, after the govt realised that the affidavit was false, the onus squarely lay on the person filing such affidavit to prove that it was not false," said Kotwal.

The prosecutor said, "Even at the time of allotment of the flats in 1995, Kokate did not inform the govt about his improved financial condition. We referred to documents showing that the Kokates supplied 70 tonnes, 80 tonnes and 120 tonnes of sugarcane in 1993, 1994 and 1995, respectively, to the Kopargaon sahakari sakhar karkahan (sugar cooperative) and made a substantial earning from this. The Kokates did not inform this to the govt when the flats were allotted to them."

Kotwal said, "This argument provided a new angle other than what was argued before the trial court. The sessions court primarily took a view of the same while confirming the conviction and sentence."

(With inputs from Swati Deshpande in Mumbai)