Punishment for breach of privileges must be proportionate to misconduct: SC

Don't want to miss the best from Business Standard?

The Supreme Court on Tuesday said that the punishment meted out to a member of a legislative assembly or council for breach of privileges must be proportionate to the misconduct.

 

Setting aside the expulsion of Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) member of legislative council Sunil Kumar Singh from the Bihar legislative council for making derogatory remarks against Chief Minister Nitish Kumar, the court ruled that punishment must align with the severity of the misconduct.

 

"There is no gainsaying that imposing a disproportionate punishment not only undermines democratic values by depriving the member from participating in the proceedings of the House but also affects the electorates of the constituency who remain unrepresented," said the bench comprising Justice Surya Kant and Justice N K Singh.

 

The removal of a member from the House is, therefore, a significant issue for both the members and the constituency they represent.

 

"If the punishment inflicted upon the member concerned appears to be prima facie harsh and disproportionate, constitutional courts owe a duty to undo such gross injustice and review the proportionality of such disqualifications or expulsions," the court said.

 

The judgment also outlined a few guiding principles for courts to consider while scrutinising the proportionality of actions taken by the House against its member(s).

 

These parameters, the court said, include the degree of obstruction caused by the member in the proceedings of the House, whether the behaviour of the member has brought disrepute to the dignity of the entire House, the previous conduct of the erring member, and the subsequent conduct of the erring member, among others.

 

"We are of the view that a scrutiny of the punishment given to the members by the House on the abovementioned framework will ensure that the legislative actions are justified, necessary, and balanced, protecting both the integrity of the legislative body and the rights of its members, as well as the larger societal objective," the court said.