Politics

PM Modi Applauds Supreme Court Landmark Ruling Against Immunity for MPs, MLAs in Bribery Cases

Prime Minister Narendra Modi praised the Supreme Court’s decision in the JMM bribery case on Monday, calling it a “great judgment” that will guarantee honest politics and increase public confidence in the legal system. The Supreme Court ruled that members of parliament and state legislators are not immune from punishment for accepting payments in exchange for speaking or voting in a legislative body. Modi shared the following on X, the former Twitter platform: “A great judgment by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, which will ensure clean politics and deepen people’s faith in the system.” Chief Justice DY Chandrachud led a seven-judge constitution bench that unanimously overturned the 1998 ruling of a five-judge panel in the JMM bribery case, which had protected MPs and MLAs from prosecution for accepting bribes in exchange for speaking or voting in the legislature.

Justices AS Bopanna, MM Sundresh, PS Narasimha, JB Pardiwala, Sanjay Kumar, and Manoj Misra were also on the bench. On behalf of the bench, the CJI read aloud the unanimous verdict, which concluded that individual lawmakers cannot use a privilege claim to seek immunity from prosecution under Articles 105 and 194 in response to claims of bribery about votes or remarks given in the legislature. In 1998, the majority ruling of the five-judge constitution bench in the Narasimha Rao versus CBI case established that members of Congress are immune from criminal prosecution for any speech they make and votes they cast within the House, as per Articles 105(2) and 194(2).

The 1998 ruling was being reviewed by the seven-judge panel. The CJI stated at the verdict announcement that Article 105 of the Constitution aims to maintain a legislative atmosphere in the House and that this atmosphere is ruined when a member is bought off to give a speech. According to Justice Chandrachud, the asserted privileges must be related to the way the House operates as a whole and to the fundamental duties that legislators must perform. On October 5 of last year, the seven-judge bench stated that it would hold off on making a decision. Throughout the hearings, the Center argued that parliamentary privilege is not intended to elevate a legislator above the law and that bribery can never be the topic of immunity.

During the hearing, the highest court stated that it would investigate whether or not legislators are immune from punishment for accepting payments to vote or give a statement in state and federal legislatures, even if their activities are criminal. The Supreme Court decided to reexamine its 1998 ruling on September 20, 2023, citing the matter as one of great significance and direct relevance to the “morality of politics.”. In 2019, Sita Soren, a JMM MLA from Jama and the daughter-in-law of party chief Shibu Soren, filed an appeal, bringing the matter before the highest court under the leadership of then Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi. In the JMM bribery affair, she was one of the accused.

Also Read: Arvind Kejriwal Responds to ED Summons in Delhi Excise Policy Case, Ready to Answer Queries After March 12

The case was sent to a five-judge bench by the Gogoi-led bench, which stated that it had “wide ramifications” and “substantial public importance.”. Sita Soren was accused in 2012 of taking bribes to support a particular candidate in the Rajya Sabha election. She argued that she should be protected by the same constitutional clause that shielded her father-in-law from punishment in the JMM bribery affair. She petitioned the Supreme Court to overturn the February 17, 2014, ruling of the Jharkhand High Court that refused to dismiss the criminal case brought against her.

In the JMM bribery case, which involved Shibu Soren, a former union minister and chief minister of Jharkhand, and four other party MPs who had accepted bribes to vote against the no-confidence motion endangering the P V Narasimha Rao government in 1993, the three-judge bench had then declared that it would review the ruling of the highest court. With their backing, the minority government of Narasimha Rao survived the vote of no-confidence. The Supreme Court dismissed the CBI’s case against Soren and the other four JMM Lok Sabha MPs, citing their constitutional protection from prosecution under Article 105(2).