The seven-judge Constitution bench of the Supreme Court said it disagreed with the judgment in PV Narasimha and the judgment in PV Narasimha which grants immunity to legislators for allegedly bribery for casting a vote or speech has “wide ramifications and overruled”.
The Supreme Court’s seven-judge bench in its unanimous view overruled the 1998 PV Narasimha Roa judgment case which granted immunity to MPs/MLAs from prosecution to bribery for voting in Parliament.
While hearing the matter, the Chief Justice said, “We have independently adjudicated on all aspects of the controversy. Do Parliamentarians enjoy immunity? We disagree and overrule majority on this aspect.”
A bench of seven judges headed by the Chief Justice of India in October last year reserved the order after hearing the submissions. Other judges on the bench are Justices AS Bopanna, MM Sundresh, PS Narasimha, JB Pardiwala, Sanjay Kumar, and Manoj Misra.
Earlier, a five-judge bench referred the matter to a larger bench of seven judges to deal with the issues, observing that it was an important issue having a significant bearing on the morality of polity.
The court said that the purpose of Article 105(2) and Article 194(2) is to ensure that members of parliament and state legislatures are able to discharge duties in an atmosphere of freedom without fear of the consequences.
On March 7, 2019, a three-judge bench of the Supreme Court referred the matter to a larger bench, considering the wide ramifications of the question that has arisen. The court had then observed that the doubts raised and the issue being a matter of substantial public importance, the matter required to be considered by a larger bench.
The issue was raised while the court was hearing a petition filed by politician Sita Soren. Sita Soren has sought the criminal prosecution launched against her to be nullified on a claim of immunity under Article 194(2) of the Constitution of India.
The charges against Sita Soren were that she had allegedly accepted a bribe to vote in favour of a particular candidate in the Rajya Sabha election that was held sometime in 2012 in Jharkhand.
As legal professionals, we recognize the profound implications of the Supreme Court of India's recent deliberations on same-sex marriage. While the Court refrained from granting full marriage equality, the discussions have paved the way for significant legal discourse on LGBTQ+ ...
Navigating the repatriation of funds as a Non-Resident Indian (NRI) can be complex, but understanding the guidelines can simplify the process and ensure compliance with Indian regulations. Here's a comprehensive overview to help NRIs manage their finances effectively. 1️⃣ ...
In today's fast-paced, technology-driven world, traditional paper-based contracts are swiftly being replaced by electronic contracts, or e-contracts. This shift is transforming the way legal agreements are created, executed, and enforced. Here’s an in-depth look at how e-contracts are revolutionizing contract ...
Ahead of the festive season, the Supreme Court on Wednesday said that it would not interfere with a decision of a state government if it decides to impose a complete ban on firecrackers, including green crackers, to check pollution level ...
Builder–buyer disputes have become one of the most common legal issues in India’s real estate sector. Delays in possession, unilateral changes in project plans, poor construction quality, refund refusals, and misleading commitments have affected thousands of home buyers across the ...
🔹 Integrity. Accountability. Confidentiality. These pillars define a true legal professional. But in today’s fast-paced legal landscape, how do we maintain them? ✔ Upholding Client Confidentiality: A lawyer’s duty is to protect sensitive information—breaching it damages trust.✔ Avoiding Conflicts of ...