NEW DELHI: Supreme Court on Monday threw light on a grey area of constitutional scheme of parliamentary democracy by ruling that elections for President, Vice-President and Rajya Sabha members are part of the functioning of Parliament or assemblies despite often being conducted when the Houses are not in session.
Interestingly, AG R Venkataramani had argued for prosecution of JMM MLA Sita Soren for accepting bribe from an independent candidate in RS polls in 2012 on the ground that the elections are not akin to voting in an assembly by an MLA and hence bribe for casting vote in RS polls is beyond the pale of immunity from prosecution granted by the PV Narasimha Rao ruling in 1998.
Refusing to agree with the AG, a seven-judge bench of CJI D Y Chandrachud, and Justices A S Bopanna, M M Sundresh, P S Narasimha, J B Pardiwala, Sanjay Kumar and Manoj Misra accepted Soren’s counsel Raju Ramachandran’s argument that voting in RS poll forms part of the privileges and immunities enjoyed by the House and its members.
Acceptance of Ramachandran’s argument, however, brought no protection for Soren, as the bench agreed with amicus curiae P S Patwalia and SG Tushar Mehta that bribe taken by legislators is an offence independent of their voting or speaking in House, which alone gets shielded by the immunity under Articles 105 and 194 of Constitution.

Writing the judgment, CJI said RS polls remain a part of the functioning of legislature and take place within the precincts of the assembly. “Similarly, elections for the President under Article 54 and for the VP under Article 66 may also take place when Parliament or state legislative assemblies are not in session. However, they are an integral part of the powers and responsibilities of elected members of Parliament and state legislative assemblies,” the bench stated.
“Vote for such elections is given in the legislature or Parliament, which is sufficient to invoke the protection of the first limb of Articles 105(2) and 194(2). Such processes are significant to the functioning of the legislature and in the broader structure of parliamentary democracy,” it said.
“There appears to be no restriction either in text of Article 105(2) and Article 194(2), which pushes such elections outside of protection provided by the provisions. Further, the purpose of parliamentary privilege to provide legislators with the platform to ‘speak’ and ‘vote’ without fear is equally applicable to elections to RS and elections for the President and VP as well,” it said, adding that even deliberations by MPs/MLAs in House Committees are protected by parliamentary privileges.
SC underlined the importance of protection given to MLAs to ensure they vote in RS elections without fear or legal prosecution. “The free and fearless exercise of franchise by elected members of legislative assembly while electing members of RS is necessary for the dignity and functioning of state assembly,” it said.





Source link

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *