Political silence on privilege-Supreme Court's decision
The seven-member Constitution bench of the supreme court gave a historic decision on march 4. This decision was related to the issue of privilege of MPs and MLAs. In this decision, the supreme court clarified an important aspect related to the privileges given to MPs or MLAs by the Constitution. MPs and MLAs have privileges under the Constitution to deliver speeches and cast votes in the House. In both these cases, MPs or MLAs are exempted from court proceedings.
The supreme court made it clear in its order that the privileges enjoyed by MPs or MLAs do not at all mean that they should take bribe to give speeches in the house or cast votes. If they do so, they will be criminally prosecuted under court proceedings. MPs and MLAs will not get any immunity from prosecution in case of taking bribe for voting or giving speech in the House.
'Cash for vote' and the issue of privilege
With this order of the seven-member Constitution Bench, the decision given by the supreme court two and a half decades ago was overturned. That decision was related to the privilege enjoyed by MPs and MLAs to vote in the House. That 1998 order of the supreme court is known as the jharkhand Mukti Morcha bribery case or 'Cash for Vote'. Although it was officially a case of P.V. narasimha Rao vs. CBI. Actually, this case was related to taking bribe of five JMM leaders to vote against the no-confidence motion against the government of former prime minister P.V. narasimha Rao in 1993. To save narasimha Rao's government, JMM MPs had taken money and voted in favor of the government. When the same matter reached the supreme court, the supreme court had virtually acquitted all the MPs in the cash-for-vote case, citing the privileges granted by the Constitution.