Add Tribune As Your Trusted Source
TrendingVideosIndia
Opinions | CommentEditorialsThe MiddleLetters to the EditorReflections
UPSC | Exam ScheduleExam Mentor
State | Himachal PradeshPunjabJammu & KashmirHaryanaChhattisgarhMadhya PradeshRajasthanUttarakhandUttar Pradesh
City | ChandigarhAmritsarJalandharLudhianaDelhiPatialaBathindaShaharnama
World | ChinaUnited StatesPakistan
Diaspora
Features | The Tribune ScienceTime CapsuleSpectrumIn-DepthTravelFood
Business | My Money
News Columns | Straight DriveCanada CallingLondon LetterKashmir AngleJammu JournalInside the CapitalHimachal CallingHill ViewBenchmark
Don't Miss
Advertisement

Mahua Moitra's 'kangaroo court' claim may not stand judicial scrutiny

Unlock Exclusive Insights with The Tribune Premium

Take your experience further with Premium access. Thought-provoking Opinions, Expert Analysis, In-depth Insights and other Member Only Benefits
Yearly Premium ₹999 ₹349/Year
Yearly Premium $49 $24.99/Year
Advertisement

Satya Prakash

Advertisement

Advertisement

New Delhi, December 8

As TMC MP Mahua Moitra cries foul over her expulsion from the Lok Sabha, her claim of being “hanged by a kangaroo court” may not withstand judicial scrutiny in view of a 2007 Constitution Bench verdict.

2007 verdict

Advertisement

By a majority of 4:1, a five-judge Constitution Bench, led by then CJI YK Sabharwal, had on January 10, 2007, upheld expulsion of 11 MPs in the 2005 “cash-for-query” scam, terming it a “self-protection” exercise by Parliament.

In a historic judgment, the Supreme Court had on January 10, 2007, upheld Parliament’s decision to expel 11 MPs — 10 from the Lok Sabha and one from the Rajya Sabha — for their involvement in the December 2005 “cash-for-query” scam.

Describing the expulsions as a “self-protection” exercise by Parliament, a five-judge Constitution Bench, led by then CJI YK Sabharwal, by a 4:1 majority had ruled that “even if some of the material on which the action is taken is found to be irrelevant, the court will still not interfere so long as there is some relevant material sustaining the action”.

While holding that Parliament has the power to expel erring MPs, it ruled that Parliament’s actions were subject to judicial review. “Proceedings (of Parliament) which may be tainted on account of substantive or gross illegality or unconstitutionality are not protected from judicial scrutiny,” it had said.

“The truth or correctness of the material (relied upon by Parliament) will not be questioned by the court nor will it go into the adequacy of the material or substitute its opinion for that of the legislature,” the Constitution Bench said.

In the 2005 the “cash-for-query” scam, a sting operation by a private TV channel had shown 10 Lok Sabha MPs and a Rajya Sabha MP accepting bribe for asking questions in Parliament. Those expelled from the Lok Sabha were Annasaheb MK Patil, YG Mahajan, Pradeep Gandhi, Suresh Chandel, CP Singh, NK Kushwaha, Raja Ram Pal, LC Kol, Ramsevak Singh and Manoj Kumar. The Rajya Sabha MP expelled was CS Lodha. They belonged to the BJP, Congress, BSP and the RJD. On April 12, 2007, a five-judge Bench, led by then CJI Chief KG Balakrishnan, dismissed the MPs’ petitions seeking review of the verdict upholding their expulsion, saying there was no merit in the petitions.

Advertisement
Tags :
LokSabhaMahuaMoitra
Show comments
Advertisement