The Supreme Court docket on Monday dominated that Members of Parliament (MPs) and Members of Legislative Meeting (MLAs) weren’t immune from prosecution for taking bribes to make a speech or vote within the legislature. The courtroom mentioned that bribery just isn’t protected by Parliamentary privileges. The courtroom additionally mentioned that MLA taking bribes to vote in Rajya Sabha elections can be prosecuted beneath the Prevention of Corruption Act (PCA).Â
The courtroom reasoned that the aim and object for legislative privileges have to be borne in thoughts. Privileges are for the home collectively. Articles 105 (2) or 194 (2) search to create a fearless atmosphere for the members of the home.
A seven-judge bench unanimously over-ruled earlier Supreme Court docket ruling by a five-judge bench in PV Narasimha Rao case. The courtroom dominated that the PV Narasimha judgment leads to a paradoxical scenario the place a legislator, who accepts a bribe and votes accordingly is protected whereas a legislator, who regardless of taking a bribe votes independently is prosecuted.
A bench comprising CJI DY Chandrachud, Justices AS Bopanna, MM Sundresh, PS Narasimha, JB Pardiwala, Sanjay Kumar and Manoj Misra overtuned the 1998 verdict and dominated that bribery just isn’t rendered immune beneath Article 105 or 194 as a result of a member indulging in bribery indulges in a legal act which isn’t important for the operate of casting a vote or giving a speech within the legislature.
The highest courtroom mentioned that it doesn’t rely upon whether or not the vote or speech is given at a later time. The offence is full when the legislator accepts a bribe.
“The offence of bribery is crystallised on the taking of unlawful gratification,” the courtroom mentioned.
The query of immunity to lawmakers got here beneath the Supreme Court docket’s scrutiny in 2019, when a bench headed by then CJI Ranjan Gogoi was listening to a plea filed by Sita Soren, a Jharkhand Mukti Morcha (JMM) MLA from Jama.
Sita Soren was accused of taking bribes to vote for a candidate within the Rajya Sabha polls in 2012. She challenged the Jharkhand excessive courtroom verdict in opposition to her and moved to the highest courtroom arguing that she enjoys immunity from prosecution. Earlier, her father-in-law Shibu Soren loved the perks of immunity to lawmakers when he was accused within the JMM bribery rip-off.
A five-judge bench of the apex courtroom in 1998 gave a verdict within the JMM bribery case by which MPs and MLAs got immunity from prosecution for taking bribes to make a speech or vote in legislature.
Â
Â
Â