Key Constitutional Provisions
- Article 105(1) – Guarantees MPs the freedom to speak in the House and its committees while Parliament is in session. It is a special parliamentary privilege distinct from the general freedom of speech under Article 19.
- Article 105(2) – Provides absolute immunity from civil or criminal liability for anything said or any vote given in Parliament or its committees. The protection is unconditional and courts cannot intervene.
- Article 121 – Restricts discussion on the conduct of Supreme Court and High Court judges, except during impeachment proceedings.
- Article 194(2) – Extends similar immunity to members of State Legislatures (MLAs).
Procedural Regulation (Parliamentary Rules)
- Rule 380 (Lok Sabha) – Empowers the Speaker to expunge words that are defamatory, indecent, unparliamentary, or undignified.
- Sub‑judice rule – Members cannot discuss matters that are pending adjudication in a court.
- Personal allegations – Defamatory or incriminatory allegations without prior notice to the Speaker are prohibited.
- Committee of Privileges – Examines alleged breaches of privilege and ensures that immunity is not misused.
Recent Supreme Court Judgments Shaping Parliamentary Privilege
| Case | Year | Key Holding |
|---|---|---|
| Tej Kiran Jain v. N. Sanjiva Reddy | 1970 | Upheld absolute immunity under Art 105(2); the term “anything” has the widest scope. |
| P.V. Narasimha Rao v. State | 1998 | MPs are immune from prosecution for bribery only if the act is directly connected to a vote in Parliament. |
| Raja Ram Pal v. Hon’ble Speaker | 2007 | Parliamentary privileges are subject to judicial review when constitutional limits are violated. |
| Kaushal Kishor v. State of UP | 2023 | A Minister’s statement is not automatically the Government’s position; liability arises only on official endorsement. |
| Sita Soren v. Union of India | 2024 | Overruled the 1998 ruling – bribery to influence speech or vote is not protected by Art 105(2) or Art 194(2). |
Significance for Governance & Policy
- Ensures robust debate: MPs can scrutinise the executive without fear of litigation, strengthening democratic accountability.
- Prevents abuse: The Committee of Privileges and expunction rules curb defamatory or unparliamentary language, preserving the dignity of the House.
- Balancing act: Article 121 and judicial pronouncements maintain a balance between legislative freedom and judicial independence.
- Evolving jurisprudence: Recent SC decisions limit the shield of immunity in cases of corruption, reinforcing ethical standards for legislators.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
- What does Article 105 provide?
- Freedom of speech in Parliament and immunity from legal proceedings for anything said or any vote given.
- Can courts question parliamentary statements?
- No, unless the act constitutes a criminal offence like bribery, which is not covered by the immunity.
- Purpose of expunction?
- To remove defamatory or unparliamentary language while preserving the substantive debate.
- Role of the Committee of Privileges?
- Investigates alleged breaches of privilege and ensures that immunity is not misused.
Relevance to UPSC Exams
- Prelims: Factual recall of Article 105, Rule 380, and landmark SC judgments.
- Mains: Analytical essays on the need for balancing parliamentary privilege with accountability, and suggestions for codifying privileges.
Previous Year Questions
- Prelims (2017): “One of the implications of equality in society is the absence of – (A) Privileges …” – highlights the constitutional concept of privileges.
- Mains (2014): Discusses the absence of legal codification of parliamentary privileges and asks for remedial measures.