Express News Service
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Wednesday agreed to re-examine its 1998 ruling in P V Narasimha Rao case, which granted immunity from prosecution to Members of Parliament (MP) and Members of Legislative Assemblies (MLA) involved in bribe-for-vote in a House. The court referred the same to a seven-judge bench.
The top court was considering arguments on whether the judgement in PV Narasimha Rao case required reference to a larger bench, while dealing with a plea filed by Jharkhand Mukti Morcha leader Sita Soren, who was accused of accepting bribe for voting in favour of a particular candidate in the 2012 Rajya Sabha elections.
The top court had, in the PV Narasimha Rao case, held that legislators enjoyed immunity from prosecution in cases of bribery in relation to parliamentary vote and speech as per Article 105(2) and Article 194(2) of the Constitution, but the same would only be extended if the legislators carried out the act that they took the bribe for.
Calling the issue having significant bearing on morality of polity, a five-judge constitution bench comprising Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, Justices AS Bopanna, MM Sundresh, JB Pardiwala, and Manoj Misra, said, “The purpose of Article 105(2) and Article 194(2) is to ensure that Members of Parliament and of state legislatures are able to discharge duties in an atmosphere of freedom without fear of the consequences that may follow. The object clearly is not to set apart the members of the legislature as persons who wield higher privileges in terms of immunity from the application of the general criminal law of the land, which citizens of the land do not possess.”
The bench remarked that although members of state legislature must be free to express their views on the floor of the House without fear of consequences, the object of the Articles was not to prima facie grant them protection from criminal proceedings for violating criminal law.
Also in top court
Pleas against NRC to be heard from Oct 17A five-judge Supreme Court bench will hear a batch of pleas challenging the updating of the National Register of Citizens (NRC) for Assam and the constitutionality of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act-1955 (1955 Act) from October 17. The provision, which was inserted into the 1955 Act following the ‘Assam Accord’, signed by the Rajiv Gandhi government with leaders of the Assam Movement on August 15, 1985, prescribed a different cut-off date for citizenship for residents of Assam, compared to other border states
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Wednesday agreed to re-examine its 1998 ruling in P V Narasimha Rao case, which granted immunity from prosecution to Members of Parliament (MP) and Members of Legislative Assemblies (MLA) involved in bribe-for-vote in a House. The court referred the same to a seven-judge bench.
The top court was considering arguments on whether the judgement in PV Narasimha Rao case required reference to a larger bench, while dealing with a plea filed by Jharkhand Mukti Morcha leader Sita Soren, who was accused of accepting bribe for voting in favour of a particular candidate in the 2012 Rajya Sabha elections.
The top court had, in the PV Narasimha Rao case, held that legislators enjoyed immunity from prosecution in cases of bribery in relation to parliamentary vote and speech as per Article 105(2) and Article 194(2) of the Constitution, but the same would only be extended if the legislators carried out the act that they took the bribe for. googletag.cmd.push(function() {googletag.display(‘div-gpt-ad-8052921-2’); });
Calling the issue having significant bearing on morality of polity, a five-judge constitution bench comprising Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, Justices AS Bopanna, MM Sundresh, JB Pardiwala, and Manoj Misra, said, “The purpose of Article 105(2) and Article 194(2) is to ensure that Members of Parliament and of state legislatures are able to discharge duties in an atmosphere of freedom without fear of the consequences that may follow. The object clearly is not to set apart the members of the legislature as persons who wield higher privileges in terms of immunity from the application of the general criminal law of the land, which citizens of the land do not possess.”
The bench remarked that although members of state legislature must be free to express their views on the floor of the House without fear of consequences, the object of the Articles was not to prima facie grant them protection from criminal proceedings for violating criminal law.
Also in top court
Pleas against NRC to be heard from Oct 17
A five-judge Supreme Court bench will hear a batch of pleas challenging the updating of the National Register of Citizens (NRC) for Assam and the constitutionality of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act-1955 (1955 Act) from October 17. The provision, which was inserted into the 1955 Act following the ‘Assam Accord’, signed by the Rajiv Gandhi government with leaders of the Assam Movement on August 15, 1985, prescribed a different cut-off date for citizenship for residents of Assam, compared to other border states
