The Supreme Court stressed the necessity of respect and decorum in legislative proceedings, declaring that punitive actions must be fair and just, particularly regarding members’ conduct and representation.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday emphasized that there is no place for aggression and indecency in the proceedings of Parliament or the legislature, and members must show complete respect and deference towards each other. The top court clarified that while the right to speak in the House is fundamental, it cannot be used as a tool to insult, humiliate, or defame a fellow member, ministers, or the chair itself.
A bench comprising Justices Surya Kant and N Kotiswar Singh criticized the conduct of Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) MLC Sunil Kumar Singh in the Bihar Legislative Council (BLC) for his sloganeering against Chief Minister Nitish Kumar. However, it set aside his expulsion from the House, calling it harsh and excessive.
“It needs no emphasis that there is no place for aggression and indecency in the proceedings of Parliament or the Legislature. Members are expected to show complete respect and deference towards each other. This expectation is not merely a matter of tradition or formality; it is essential for the effective functioning of democratic processes,”
the bench stated.
The court underscored that respectful discourse ensures that debates remain productive, focused on relevant issues, and conducted in a manner that upholds the dignity of the institution.
While discussing the judiciary’s role in reviewing legislative punishments, the bench noted that constitutional courts must ensure that penalties imposed on members are proportionate and just.
“Imposing a disproportionate punishment not only undermines democratic values by depriving the member of participation in the House but also affects the electorate, leaving them unrepresented,“
the court observed.
Justice Surya Kant, who authored the verdict, stated that legislators are agents of the electorate, obligated to reflect the opinions and values of the people they represent. He added that removing a member from the House is a significant decision impacting both the individual and their constituency.
“The absence of a duly elected representative disrupts the democratic process and undermines the voice of the electorate,”
the bench emphasized. It further stated that if a punishment appears harsh and disproportionate, constitutional courts have a duty to review and rectify such injustices.
On July 26, 2024, Mr. Singh was expelled from the Bihar Legislative Council for his unruly behavior in the House. He was accused of sloganeering against Chief Minister Nitish Kumar on February 13, 2024, during a heated debate. The motion for his expulsion was passed by voice vote, a day after the ethics committee submitted its report to acting chairman Awadhesh Narain Singh.
Additionally, Mr. Singh was charged with “insulting the chief minister by mimicking his body language” and questioning the competence of the ethics committee members after appearing before it.
The Supreme Court reaffirmed that while courts must respect legislative decisions, they also hold the responsibility of ensuring justice aligns with constitutional values.
“We reiterate that courts must reflect a certain degree of deference to the legislative will and wisdom, intervening only when the action prescribed is so disproportionate that it shocks the intrinsic sense of justice,”
the bench stated.
The verdict emphasized that courts should intervene only when necessary and that disciplinary actions within legislative bodies should be fair, just, and proportionate to the offense.
With this ruling, the Supreme Court has reinforced the importance of maintaining decorum in legislative houses while ensuring that punitive actions do not violate democratic principles.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE