On Monday, the Supreme Court ruled that Members of Parliament (MPs) and Members of Legislative Assemblies (MLAs) cannot claim immunity from prosecution under Articles 105 and Article 194 of the Constitution when accused of taking bribes.
[Sita Soren v. Union of India]
Article 105(2) grants MPs immunity from prosecution for their parliamentary speech or votes.
Similarly, Article 194(2) extends similar protection to MLAs.
Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud, along with Justices AS Bopanna, MM Sundresh, PS Narasimha, JB Pardiwala, PV Sanjay Kumar, and Manoj Misra, delivered a unanimous verdict this morning.
The Court overturned its 1998 judgment in PV Narasimha Rao v. State, which granted immunity to legislators accused of bribery for their votes or speech in the legislature.
The Court emphasized that immunity applies only if the action is connected to the collective functioning of the legislative house and is essential to a legislator’s duties. However, bribery undermines the free deliberative environment and is not protected by parliamentary privilege.
Therefore, the Court held that legislators cannot claim immunity under Articles 105 and 194 for bribery charges related to their votes or speech in the legislature. The Court also clarified that taking a bribe itself constitutes an offense, regardless of whether the promised action is performed.
Criminal courts have jurisdiction over bribery cases against legislators, notwithstanding the authority of the legislative house to address such cases.
The immunities under Articles 105(2) and 194(2) also apply to Rajya Sabha elections and elections for the President and Vice-President.