Supreme Court sets two-month deadline for Nirmala Sapre anti-defection case

The Supreme Court has ordered the Madhya Pradesh Legislative Assembly Speaker to decide a pending anti-defection petition against Congress MLA Nirmala Sapre within two months. The bench, comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana, issued the directive on November 4, 2026, in the case Umang Singhar v. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors. The Court cited its 2025 precedent in Padi Kaushik Reddy Vs State of Telangana, where it directed a speaker to decide petitions within three months.

Senior Advocate Vivek Tankha, appearing for petitioner and Leader of Opposition Umang Singhar, requested a shorter deadline. The Court initially proposed three months but modified its order to two months after Tankha's plea. Tankha stated that two and a half years had passed since the petition's filing and another two years of the assembly’s term remained, urging an early decision. The disqualification petition has been pending since an application was moved before the Speaker on June 30, 2024.

Petition challenges Sapre's alleged party switch

The petition alleges that Nirmala Sapre, a first-time MLA elected from the Bina constituency in Sagar district on a Congress ticket in 2023, voluntarily relinquished her party membership to join the BJP. Sapre appeared on a BJP platform in May 2024 during the Lok Sabha election campaign and announced her decision to join the ruling party. However, Sapre maintains she neither resigned from Congress nor formally joined the BJP and continues to claim Congress membership, calling the allegations baseless.

High Court previously rejected time-bound ruling request

The Madhya Pradesh High Court had declined to direct the Speaker to expedite proceedings in June of this year. It dismissed Singhar's plea seeking a time-bound decision, stating no extraordinary circumstances existed. The high court noted that proceedings were underway, Sapre denied the allegations, and the assembly had two years remaining in its tenure. It concluded it was not appropriate to issue a direction to the Speaker due to an absence of demonstrated urgency.

Court rejects tenure-based delay arguments

The Supreme Court overturned that reasoning. It held that petitions under the Tenth Schedule, the anti-defection law, must be decided expeditiously regardless of the assembly's remaining timeline. The Court ruled that high courts should not decline to issue directions to speakers merely because the assembly has substantial tenure left. "Even in a case where the court finds that there is no urgency, issues like these should be dealt with expeditiously," the Supreme Court said. It reinforced this principle by referencing its earlier judgments in Padi Kaushik Reddy and Keisham Meghachandra Singh Vs Speaker, Manipur Legislative Assembly (2021). In the 2021 case, the Court held that three months should ordinarily be the outer limit for deciding such petitions.

The Speaker must now decide the disqualification petition against Nirmala Sapre within two months as directed by the Supreme Court.