oppn parties No Immunity For Legislators For Criminal Acts In House

News Snippets

  • The Indian envoy in Bangladesh was summoned by the country's government over the breach in the Bangladesh mission in Agartala
  • Bank account to soon have 4 nominees each
  • TMC and SP stayed away from the INDIA bloc protest over the Adani issue in the Lok Sabha
  • Delhi HC stops the police from arresting Nadeem Khan over a viral video which the police claimed promoted 'enmity'. Court says 'India's harmony not so fragile'
  • Trafiksol asked to refund IPO money by Sebi on account of alleged fraud
  • Re goes down to 84.76 against the USD but ends flat after RBI intervenes
  • Sin goods like tobacco, cigarettes and soft drinks likely to face 35% GST in the post-compensation cess era
  • Bank credit growth slows to 11% (20.6% last year) with retail oans also showing a slowdown
  • Stock markets continue their winning streak on Tuesday: Sensex jumps 597 points to 80845 and Nifty gains 181 points to 24457
  • Asian junior hockey: Defending champions India enter the finals by beating Malaysia 3-1, to play Pakistan for the title
  • Chess World title match: Ding Liren salvages a sraw in the 7th game which he almost lost
  • Experts speculate whether Ding Liren wants the world title match against D Gukesh to go into tie-break after he let off Gukesh easily in the 5th game
  • Tata Memorial Hospital and AIIMS have severely criticized former cricketer and Congress leader Navjot Singh Sidhu for claiming that his wife fought back cancer with home remedies like haldi, garlic and neem. The hospitals warned the public for not going for such unproven remedies and not delaying treatment as it could prove fatal
  • 3 persons died and scores of policemen wer injured when a survey of a mosque in Sambhal near Bareilly in UP turned violent
  • Bangladesh to review power pacts with Indian companies, including those of the Adani group
D Gukesh is the new chess world champion at 18, the first teen to wear the crown. Capitalizes on an error by Ding Liren to snatch the crown by winning the final game g
oppn parties
No Immunity For Legislators For Criminal Acts In House

By Sunil Garodia
First publised on 2021-07-29 06:45:24

About the Author

Sunil Garodia Editor-in-Chief of indiacommentary.com. Current Affairs analyst and political commentator.

In a landmark judgment, the Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday that it would be wrong to focus just on the rights of the elected representatives and ignore the corresponding duties cast upon them and hence, the privileges and immunity granted to them could not act as a shield against criminal acts carried out in the House. The court said that "it was not the intention of the drafters of the Constitution to extend the interpretation of 'freedom of speech' to include criminal acts by placing them under a veil of protest".

The case before the apex court was a plea by Kerala that sought to quash a case against several MLAs of the LDF who had vandalized property in the state assembly while protesting against the budget presented by the UDF government in 2015. The cost of the damaged property was ascertained to be Rs 2,20,093. The court said that the withdrawal of prosecution against the MLAs "would amount to an interference with the normal course of justice for illegitimate reasons. Such an action is clearly extraneous to the vindication of the law to which all organs of the executive are bound".

Making a clear distinction between the privileges and immunity granted to legislators under the Constitution and the criminal acts of vandalism inside assemblies or Parliament, the court was of the opinion that the privileges granted to legislators were only "to enable them to perform their functions without interference, fear or favour". But that does not mean that they are privileged to vandalize public property under the garb of protest. The court also categorically stated that "privileges and immunities are not gateways (for MPs/MLAs) to claim exemption from the general law of the land".

MLAs and MPs sometimes behave inappropriately inside assemblies and Parliament. Apart from abusing each other and indulging in scuffles, they also damage public property by breaking mikes, throwing chairs, upturning tables and destroying other property on the premises. Apart from setting a wrong example (which the apex court said was to "betray the trust which is impressed on the character of elected representatives as makers and enactors of the law"), such damage also involves a monetary cost that needs to be made good by them. The Supreme Court is right in holding them accountable, just like any ordinary citizens, for criminal acts inside the House.