The Supreme Court has indicated that it may close the seven-judge reference on legislative privileges, after it was told that the 2003 Tamil Nadu Assembly resolution at its root was withdrawn in 2004, with the Chief Justice of India saying the Court will not indulge in a mere academic exercise.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
New Delhi: The Supreme Court has indicated that it may formally close the long-pending reference on the scope of legislative privileges under Article 194(3) of the Constitution, after being informed that the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly’s 2003 resolution against journalists of The Hindu was revoked in 2004 [N. Ravi v. Speaker, Legislative Assembly, Chennai].
The matter was before a Bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant. The seven-judge Bench constituted for the reference comprises the Chief Justice and Justice Aravind Kumar, Justice P.K. Mishra, Justice Joymalya Bagchi, Justice Vipul Pancholi, Justice Sree Chandrashekhar and Justice V. Mohana.
Background
The reference arises from Writ Petition (Criminal) Nos. 206-210 of 2003. In April 2003, The Hindu published an editorial titled “Rising Intolerance”, criticising then Chief Minister J. Jayalalithaa. The Assembly alleged a breach of privilege, and on November 7, 2003, Speaker K. Kalimuthu passed a resolution. Editor N. Ravi, Executive Editor Malini Parthasarathy, Bureau Chief V. Jayant, Special Correspondent Radha Venkatesan and Publisher S. Rangarajan were arrested. The arrests were stayed on November 10, 2003.
The case was referred to a seven-judge Bench to examine the interplay between Articles 194(3), 19(1)(a) and 21 of the Constitution and conflicting precedents on legislative privilege and fundamental rights. It has remained pending for over two decades.
What the parties told the Court
Senior Advocate Raju Ramachandran, appearing for Tamil Nadu, informed the Bench that the 2003 Assembly resolution was revoked in 2004. As the cause of action no longer survives, he said, the reference may have become academic. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta agreed that the issue may have become academic given the withdrawal of the resolution.
Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal acknowledged that the reference may be academic, but submitted that the question of the misuse of legislative privileges remains of “great significance.”
The Chief Justice’s remarks
The Chief Justice said:
“If the issue survives, we will decide. If it doesn’t, we will wait for a proper opportunity.”
He added that “the Court will not indulge in a mere academic exercise.”
Next step
The Chief Justice indicated that the seven-judge Bench would assemble on October 6 at 10:30 AM to formally dispose of the reference by recording that the impugned resolution was withdrawn. The Bench would then be discharged, leaving time for other part-heard matters.
Why the Supreme Court legislative privileges reference matters
A reference that was to run from October 6 to October 15 now appears likely to end on its first day, without the Supreme Court ruling on how far legislatures can use privilege against the press. The Bench’s stated reason is that a court will not decide a question that no longer arises on the facts.
The submission that the underlying question remains important, which Mr Sibal made, and the several applications to intervene that have been filed by journalists and others, show that the constitutional issue is still live in public debate. The remarks are the Bench’s indications at a hearing, and the reference is yet to be formally disposed of.
Case Title: N. Ravi v. Speaker, Legislative Assembly, Chennai [W.P. (Cri.) Nos. 206-210 of 2003]
Bench: Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Aravind Kumar, Justice P.K. Mishra, Justice Joymalya Bagchi, Justice Vipul Pancholi, Justice Sree Chandrashekhar and Justice V. Mohana, Supreme Court of India
Appearances: Raju Ramachandran, Senior Advocate, for Tamil Nadu; Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General; Kapil Sibal, Senior Advocate