No immunity from prosecution to MPs, MLAs for taking bribes to vote in legislature: SC

Live Law reported that the apex court also noted that unlike the House of Commons in the United Kingdom, India does not have ‘ancient and undoubted privileges’ vested after a struggle between the Parliament and the monarch.

Privileges in pre-independence India were governed by statute in the face of a reluctant colonial government. This statutory privilege transitioned into a constitutional privilege after the commencement of the Constitution.

However, a legislator cannot claim immunity from prosecution on charges of bribery for a vote or a speech by relying on these constitutional provisions since it fails to fulfil the two-fold test of first, being tethered to the collective functioning of the House, and second, being necessary for the discharge of the essential duties of a legislator.

Live Law quoted the bench as saying, “Articles 105 and 194 of the Constitution seek to sustain an environment where debate and deliberation can take place within the legislature. This purpose is destroyed when a member is induced to vote or speak in a particular manner because of an act of bribery…Bribery is not rendered immune under Articles 105 or 194 because a member engaging in bribery indulges in a criminal act which is not essential for the function of casting a vote or giving a speech in the legislature. Corruption and bribery by members of the legislatures erode probity in public life…We hold that bribery is not protected by Parliamentary privileges.”