A
seven-judge bench of the Supreme Court on Thursday reserved its verdict on
reconsideration of its 1998 judgement which had held that MPs and MLAs enjoy
immunity from prosecution for taking bribe to make a speech or vote in
legislature.
The
constitution bench headed by Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud reserved the verdict
after hearing a battery of senior lawyers including Attorney General R
Venkataramani and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta.
The
larger bench is reconsidering the 1998 verdict delivered in the JMM bribery
case by a five-judge bench by which the MPs and MLAs were granted immunity from
prosecution for taking bribe to make a speech or vote in legislature. The apex
court is revisiting the judgement 25 years after the JMM bribery scandal rocked
the country.
Solicitor
General Tushar Mehta, while arguing the matter, urged the court to not go into
the immunity aspect under Article 105 of the Constitution.
The
offence of bribery is complete when a bribe is given and accepted by the
lawmaker. It can be tackled under the Prevention of Corruption Act, the law
officer said.
Neither
the majority nor minority (judgement of 1998) examined the issue from this
perspective. The short question, on which present reference is based, is
whether the offence of bribery is complete outside the House. If it is, this
court does not need to go into the question of immunity, the law officer said.
On
Wednesday, the court said it will examine whether the immunity granted to
lawmakers from prosecution for taking bribes to make a speech or vote in
Parliament and state legislatures extends to them even if criminality is
attached to their actions.
Article
105(2) stipulates that no member of Parliament shall be liable to any
proceedings in court in respect of anything said or any vote cast in Parliament
or any committee thereof. A similar provision exists for MLAs under Article
194(2).
A
five-judge constitution bench had in its majority verdict delivered in the PV
Narasimha Rao versus CBI case had held in 1998 that parliamentarians have immunity
against criminal prosecution for any speech made and vote cast inside the House
under Article 105(2) and Article 194(2) of the Constitution.
The
Rao government, which was in a minority, had survived a no-confidence vote with
the help of the Jharkhand Mukti Morcha (JMM) Lok Sabha MPs who had accepted
bribes to back his dispensation.