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.