The central legal point established in the judgment is that the right of a member of the State Legislature to attend the Assembly session may be restricted if it potentially affects an ongoing criminal investigation.

JUDGMENT - GOKHALE H.L., J.:---Heard Mr. Pradhan for the petitioner and Mr. Raja Thakare, Special Public Prosecutor for the respondent.

2.The petitioner is a member of the Maharashtra State Legislative Assembly elected from Dhule. The petitioner has been arrested on 29th June, 2003 for commission of offences under the provisions of Maharashtra Control of Organized Crimes Act, 1999 (MCOC Act). A.C.R. has been registered by Band Garden Police Station, Pune under sections 120-B, 255, 260, 263-A, 419, 420, 471 to 476, 109 and 34 of Indian Penal Code read with section 63(A)(b) of the Bombay Stamp Act, 1958 and sections 3, 4 and 24 of the said MCOC Act read with sections 7, 12 and 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act. The petitioner is accused No. 45 under this C.R. and as of now the number of accused is 62.

3.In the month of July 2003, the Monsoon Session of the State Assembly was held. The petitioner had applied for attending the said Session by moving an application to the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Pune. It however appears that the application was adjourned to a long date and it became infructuous. Now the Winter Session is being held from 8th December, 2003 at Nagpur and the petitioner is desirous of attending it.

4.For this purpose, the petitioner initially filed a criminal application invoking section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure for a temporary bail. However, in view of the order passed by the learned Single Judge, the petitioner was permitted to convert the application in to a writ petition, which he has done and that is how the present petition has been filed.

5.The petition is opposed by filing a reply by one Shri P.R. Choudhary, Deputy Superintendent Police under the Special Investigation Team, Pune which is investigating the offences as stated above. The offences principally are concerning an organized crime syndicate whereunder counterfeit stamps were sold in an organized manner depriving the State revenue of thousands of crores of rupees.

6.Mr. Pradhan, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, submitted that under Article 194(2) of the Constitution, there are certain privileges which are available to the members of the State Legislatures. Article 194(1) guarantees a freedom of speech to a member of the House and Article 194(2) provides that a member of the Legislature shall not be liable for any proceedings in any Court in respect of anything said or any vote given by him in the Legislature. Undoubtedly these are privileges of the Member of Assembly and there can be no dispute that they should be safeguarded. Mr. Pradhan tried to submit that when such a privilege was available under Article 194(2), it could not be curtailed by any Executive Act. However, as far as this submission is concerned, he could not show any infringement thereof in the context of the petitioner since he is taken in custody for investigation in an offence.

7.Mr. Pradhan relied upon Article 190(4) also which provides that if a member does not attend the House for a period of 60 days without permission, then his seat was liable to be declared vacant. Mr. Pradhan stated that the petitioner has attended all the Sessions so far and that too on all the days except the Monsoon Session and he fears that eventually he will be hit by this Article. As far as this submission is concerned, there is a clear provision for moving the House to seek the necessary permission. In any case, Mr. Pradhan accepted that as of now no occasion to forfeit the membership has arisen. Through this petition, the petitioner is seeking that he should be permitted to attend the House for the Winter Session being held in Nagpur. Although the prayer is for temporary bail, Mr. Pradhan submitted that if the Court so deems fit, the petitioner may be taken to the House in police escort everyday and after the Session is over, he may be taken in custody. However, as stated above, as far as these two submissions based on Articles 194(2) and 190(4) are concerned, we

Click Here to Read the rest of this document