NEW DELHI: On Monday, the Supreme Court made a revolutionary legal move. They reversed a key 1998 ruling. This past ruling had safeguarded lawmakers from legal consequences for taking bribes in return for speeches and votes in the legislature. A seven-member constitutional bench provided a united decision. India's Chief Justice DY Chandrachud made clear, "Bribery is complete when bribery is accepted".
"We have independently adjudicated on all aspects of the controversy" stated Chief Justice Chandrachud, presiding over the bench, "Do Parliamentarians enjoy immunity? We disagree and overrule the majority on this aspect."
The 1998 ruling had previously asserted that lawmakers - Parliament Members (MPs) and Legislative Assemblies Members (MLAs) - were protected from legal prosecution for taking bribes in exchange for speeches and votes. They were shielded by parliamentary privileges given by two Constitution articles - 105(2) and 194(2).
But, this recent law-changing verdict is a reaction to a 2012 legal appeal. In this appeal, Sita Soren, party leader of Jharkhand Mukti Morcha, who stood accused of taking a bribe for a Rajya Sabha vote, claimed immunity under Article 105. After the Jharkhand High Court rejected the appeal, it was then contested in the Supreme Court.
When a two-day hearing in October 2023 ended, the seven-judge bench withheld their decision, finally leading to this significant reversal. During the ruling's disclosure, Chief Justice Chandrachud clarified that "Article 105 does not provide immunity from bribery". Further, he noted that receiving a bribe for "unlawful gain does not hinge on whether the vote or speech is given later". As per the Chief Justice, when a legislator accepts a bribe, the crime is deemed finished.
An important new verdict changes how we understand parliament rights. It shows a tough view against corruption in government groups. It also underscores the court's promise to support honesty in the public's lives.
ALSO READ:
ALSO WATCH: