Amarinder Singh v. Punjab Vidhan Sabha, 2010 (6) SCC 113

Arts. 194(3) and 105(3) - Privileges of the House - Improper exercise of - Alleged criminal misconduct of Member allegedly affecting dignity of House - Whether obstruction of legislative business - Justifiability of exercising House privileges for mitigating - Resolution directing expulsion of appellant for remainder of thirteenth term of Punjab Vidhan Sabha on allegations of criminal misconduct relating back to appellant's tenure as Chief Minister of Punjab during twelfth term of Punjab Vidhan Sabha, directing filing of FIR and custodial interrogation - Appellant allegedly responsible for improper exemption of vacant plot of land licensed to a private party from a pool of 187 acres of land notified for acquisition by Amritsar Land Improvement Trust for a development scheme - Whether obstruction of ordinary legislative functions warranting invocation of privileges of the House - Held, proper course of action for State Government would have been to move criminal law machinery with filing of a complaint followed by investigation contemplated under CrPC -Punjab Vidhan Sabha exceeded its powers by expelling appellant on ground of breach of privilege when there existed none - Alleged improper exemption of land was an executive act and did not distort, obstruct or threaten integrity of legislative proceedings in any manner - Hence, action under Art. 194(3) not proper - Resolution directing expulsion of appellant, held, constitutionally invalid - Restoration of appellant's membership in Punjab Vidhan Sabha directed -

However, clarified that this was not to affect criminal proceedings, if any, in the matter, (2010) 6 SCC 113-A

Constitution of India

Arts. 194 and 105 - Powers, privileges and immunities of State Legislature - Nature, scope and purpose – Operative principles and precedents relating to Indian legislatures under Arts. 105 and 194, examined - Held, the same are

exercised to safeguard integrity of legislative functions against obstructions which could be caused by members as well as non-members - They are not an end in themselves, (2010) 6 SCC 113-B

Constitution of India

Arts. 194(3) & 105(3) and 190, 191, 101 & 102 - Powers, privileges and immunities of State Legislatures and Parliament - Scope - Non-codification of, in India - Principles and precedents of British House of Commons - Applicability to legislative bodies in India - Evolution and history of the same in England, traced - Applicable norms relating to membership, disqualification and vacation of seats - Held, British precedents are to be followed only to the extent compatible with our Constitutional scheme - Indian legislatures controlled by a written Constitution hence do not have

absolute power of self-composition, unlike British House of Commons which is controlled by an unwritten Constitution -

Some British precedents are clear instances of overreach and examples of arbitrary exercise of privileges, (2010) 6 SCC

113-C

Constitution of India

Arts. 194, 105, 122 & 212 and 32, 136 & 226 - Powers, privileges and immunities of State Legislature - Exercise of - Judicial scrutiny/review of - Permissibility and scope - Principles guiding judicial scrutiny of the same, as laid down in Raja Ram Pal case, (2007) 3 SCC 184, reiterated - Held, Court is empowered to scrutinise exercise of House privileges including power of a legislative chamber to punish for contempt of itself - Court cannot inquire into matters related to irregularities in observance of procedures of the legislature but can examine whether proceedings conducted under Arts. 105(3) or 194(3) are tainted on account of substantive or gross illegality or unconstitutionality - Facts in present case do not merely touch on a procedural irregularity - Act of recommending appellant's expulsion through impugned resolution cannot be justified as a proper exercise of powers, privileges and immunities of the House, (2010) 6 SCC 113-D

Constitution of India

Arts. 194(3) and 105(3) - Powers, privileges and immunities of State Legislature - House privileges - Breach of, by a member - When arises - Held, when a member's act is directly connected with or bears proximity to his duties, role or functions as a legislator - Test of proximity should be the rule of thumb - Expulsion of members should only be sustained if their actions have caused obstructions to legislative functions or are likely to cause the same - It was difficult to see how improper exemption of a particular plot of land from an acquisition scheme caused an obstruction to the conduct of legislative business, (2010) 6 SCC 113-E

Arts. 194(3) and 105(3) - Powers, privileges and immunities of State Legislature - House privileges - Exercise of – If wider than remedial power of preventing obstructions to legislative functions - Expulsion of member from membership of House - Whether House privileges exercisable in cases of ``lowering the dignity of the House'', ``conduct unbecoming of a Member of the House'' and ``unfitness of a member'' - Held, said grounds are openly worded and abstract grounds – If recognised as valid grounds for exercise of House privileges, will trigger indiscriminate and disproportionate use of the

same, (2010) 6 SCC 113-F

Arts. 194(3) and 105(3) - House privileges - Power of House to punish for contempt of itself - Scope of - Power of a legislative chamber to punish for its own contempt should broadly coincide with legislature's interest in protecting the integrity of its functions - In exceptional circumstances acts taking place outside the four walls of the House could have effect of distorting, obstructing or diluting the integrity of legislative functions, (2010) 6 SCC 113-G

Constitution of India

Arts. 194(3) & 105(3) and 107(3), 174(2)(a) & (b) & 196 - Powers, privileges and immunities of State Legislature - Exercise of House privilege - Against executive acts of member committed during previous term of House – Permissibility - Thirteenth Vidhan Sabha claiming breach of privileges on account of incident occurring during its twelfth term - Dissolution of Legislative Assembly, meaning and implications of, on ordinary legislative business, examined - Held, ordinarily legislative business does not survive dissolution of the House - Exception is ``doctrine of lapse'' - In present

case, it was untenable to allow exercise of House privileges to punish past executive acts especially when there was no pending motion, report or any other order of business relatable to executive acts at time of reconstitution of the House – If permitted, courts are likely to be flooded with cases involving political rivalries, (2010) 6 SCC 113-H

Arts. 194(3) and 105(3) - Powers, privileges and immunities of State Legislature - Exercise of House privileges – Sub judice matters - Norms to be followed - Resolution directing expulsion of member in respect of sub judice matter - Permissibility - Held, Rules of Business and Conduct of Punjab Vidhan Sabha categorically lay down a prohibition on taking up of any matter pending adjudication before a court of law - It is a settled principle that ordinarily content of legislative proceedings should not touch on sub judice matters - Thus, alleged improper exemption of land by appellant

already having been questioned before High Court, Vidhan Sabha ought not to have constituted a committee to inquire

into the same, (2010) 6 SCC 113-I

Separation of powers

Powers of legislature - Limits of - Impugned resolution passed by Vidhan Sabha containing directions as to how the criminal investigation into appellant's alleged wrongdoing should be conducted - Resolution also containing directions regarding filing of FIRs, custodial interrogation and to Vigilance Department - Improper intrusion on province of executive

and judiciary - Held, doctrine of separation of powers is an inseparable part of parliamentary democracy - Legislative

body not entrusted with power of adjudicating a case once an appropriate forum is in existence under the constitutional scheme - For functions within domain of executive, role of legislature could at best be recommendatory – Determination of guilt or innocence is a role properly reserved for trial Judge - Only exception is when impugned acts have the effect of distorting, obstructing or threatening integrity of legislative proceedings, thereby warranting the exercise of privileges - Hence, a jurisdictional error was committed by Punjab Vidhan Sabha in passing said resolution, (2010) 6 SCC 113-J

RELATED Blog

Your Message

0 comments

Load more comments