New Delhi: In a groundbreaking ruling on Monday, the Supreme Court of India, led by Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud, said lawmakers in Parliament and state legislatures are not shielded from prosecution in bribery cases.
This decision overturns a 1998 judgment by a five-member Constitution bench, which had granted immunity to lawmakers in instances where they accepted bribes for speeches or votes in the House.
The court emphasised that bribery does not fall under parliamentary privileges and that the interpretation of the 1998 verdict contradicts Articles 105 and 194 of the Constitution, which provide legal immunity to elected representatives to enable them to carry out their duties without fear.
Chief Justice Chandrachud stated, “We disagree with the judgment in the PV Narasimha case. The wide-ranging implications of granting immunity to legislators for accepting bribes to cast votes necessitate our dissent.”
Also Read: Google apologises after Gemini calls PM Modi ‘fascist’, admits chatbot is ‘unreliable’
The PV Narasimha Rao case arose during a no-confidence motion against his government in July 1993, where his minority government survived by a narrow margin. However, a year later, allegations surfaced that legislators of the Jharkhand Mukti Morcha had accepted bribes to support the government. In 1998, the Supreme Court ruled that lawmakers’ immunity from prosecution extended to their votes and speeches within the House.
Also Read: ‘You abuse your right’: Supreme Court raps Udhayanidhi Stalin for ‘eradicate Sanatan dharma’ remark
The Supreme Court ruling emphasised that a claim for immunity in such cases does not serve the essential function of discharging legislative duties. It stated, “We assert that bribery is not shielded by parliamentary privileges. Corruption and bribery among legislators undermine the functioning of Indian parliamentary democracy. An MLA accepting a bribe to vote in Rajya Sabha elections is also subject to liability under the Prevention of Corruption Act.”
Chief Justice Chandrachud highlighted the paradoxical nature of the PV Narasimha judgment, wherein a legislator who accepts a bribe and votes accordingly is protected, while one who votes independently despite taking a bribe faces prosecution.
Read all the World News, Business News, Sports News, Entertainment News, Business News and Opinion here. Follow us on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram.
