MPs sold for lakhs...India shaken by bribery scandal..?
MPs sold for lakhs...India shaken by bribery scandal..?
In 1993, the nation's economy became more accessible to foreign businesses. While the congress administration under PV narasimha Rao was gloating, a scandal occurred that rocked the nation as a whole. In reality, MPs were charged with accepting bribes for the first time. Up until today, there has been a major doubt regarding the sanctity of the largest panchayat parliament in the nation. This incident is making headlines in indian politics once more, thirty-one years later. The supreme Court's ruling serves as the justification. A supreme court bench consisting of seven members reversed the court's own 26-year-old ruling regarding paying for votes. The supreme Court's 7-judge panel reversed its own 26-year-old ruling regarding paying for votes. MPs and MLAs who accept bribes in order to cast ballots or ask questions in the house will not be shielded from punishment under the privilege of voting, according to a bench led by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud.In its 1998 ruling, a five-judge supreme court panel examined accepting bribes to cast a vote within the house as a privilege. The majority of the five-judge constitutional bench at the time had declared that no prosecution would be brought against MPs and MLAs for presenting remarks in the house or accepting payments in exchange for votes.Why was the cash-for-vote issue brought before the court again?Following the supreme Court's 1998 ruling, the cash-for-vote controversy was thought to be resolved; nevertheless, in 2012, it resurdata-faced. In reality, Sita Soren of JMM was charged with stealing Rs 1.5 crore from independent rajya sabha candidate rk Aggarwal during the 2012 elections. The cbi was given charge of the case's investigation. In this case, the cbi turned Sita Soren's attendant into a government witness. After Soren's side was represented in the 1998 narasimha Rao v. State case, the case made it all the way to the supreme court once more. In the cash-for-vote controversy, the supreme court decided to take up the case once more and appointed a bench of seven justices.
In 1993, the nation's economy became more accessible to foreign businesses. While the congress administration under PV narasimha Rao was gloating, a scandal occurred that rocked the nation as a whole. In reality, MPs were charged with accepting bribes for the first time. Up until today, there has been a major doubt regarding the sanctity of the largest panchayat parliament in the nation. This incident is making headlines in indian politics once more, thirty-one years later. The supreme Court's ruling serves as the justification. A supreme court bench consisting of seven members reversed the court's own 26-year-old ruling regarding paying for votes. The supreme Court's 7-judge panel reversed its own 26-year-old ruling regarding paying for votes. MPs and MLAs who accept bribes in order to cast ballots or ask questions in the house will not be shielded from punishment under the privilege of voting, according to a bench led by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud.In its 1998 ruling, a five-judge supreme court panel examined accepting bribes to cast a vote within the house as a privilege. The majority of the five-judge constitutional bench at the time had declared that no prosecution would be brought against MPs and MLAs for presenting remarks in the house or accepting payments in exchange for votes.Why was the cash-for-vote issue brought before the court again?Following the supreme Court's 1998 ruling, the cash-for-vote controversy was thought to be resolved; nevertheless, in 2012, it resurdata-faced. In reality, Sita Soren of JMM was charged with stealing Rs 1.5 crore from independent rajya sabha candidate rk Aggarwal during the 2012 elections. The cbi was given charge of the case's investigation. In this case, the cbi turned Sita Soren's attendant into a government witness. After Soren's side was represented in the 1998 narasimha Rao v. State case, the case made it all the way to the supreme court once more. In the cash-for-vote controversy, the supreme court decided to take up the case once more and appointed a bench of seven justices.