Supreme Court of India
A.K. PATNAIK, SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA, JJ.
Lily Thomas & Others
Versus
Union of India & Others
WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NOS. 490 OF 2005, 231 OF 2005, 694 OF 2004, CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 3040-3041 OF 2004
Decided on : 10-07-2013
Constitution of India—Articles 102(1)(e) and 191(1)(e) read with Articles 246(1) read with Entry 97 of List I of Seventh Schedule and Article 248—Representation of the People Act, 1951—Section 8(4)—Parliament does not have power under Articles 102(1)(e) and 191(1)(e) of Constitution to make different laws for a person to be disqualified for being chosen as a member and for a person to be disqualified for continuing as a member of Parliament or State Legislature—If because of a disqualification a person cannot be chosen as a member of Parliament or State Legislature, for same disqualification, he cannot continue as a member of Parliament or State Legislature—Disqualification for both a person to be chosen as a Member of a House of Parliament or State Legislature or for a person to continue as a member of Parliament or State Legislature has to be same. (Para 16)
Representation of the People Act, 1951—Section 8(4)—Constitution of India—Articles 102(1)(e) and 191(1)(e)—Once a person who was a member of either House of Parliament or House of State Legislature becomes disqualified by or under any law made by Parliament under Articles 102(1)(e) and 191(1)(e) of Constitution, his seat automatically falls vacant by virtue of Articles 101(3)(a) and 190(3)(a) of Constitution and Parliament cannot make a provision as in sub-section (4) of Section 8 of 1951 Act to defer date on which disqualification of a sitting member will have effect and prevent his seat becoming vacant on account of disqualification under Article 102(1)(e) or Article 191(1)(e) of Constitution—Filling of seat which falls vacant, however, may await decision of President or Governor under Articles 103 and 192 respectively of Constitution—If President or Governor takes a view that member has not become subject to any of disqualifications mentioned in clause (1) of Articles 102 and 191 respectively of Constitution, it has to be held that seat of member so held not to be disqualified did not become vacant on the date on which member was alleged to have been subject to disqualification—Sub-section (4) of Section 8 of 1951 Act which carves out a saving in the case of sitting members of Parliament or State Legislature from disqualifications under sub-sections (1), (2) and (3) of Section 8 of 1951 Act or which defers date on which disqualification will take effect in the case of a sitting member of Parliament or a State Legislature is beyond powers conferred on Parliament by Constitution—Sub-section (4) of Section 8 of 1951 Act is ultra vires Constitution. (Para 17 to 20)
Representation of the People Act, 1951—Section 8(4)—Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973—Sections 389 and 482—Disqualification to contest election under sub-section (1), (2) or (3) of Section 8 of 1951 Act will not operate from date of order of stay of conviction passed by Appellate Court under Section 389 of Code or High Court under Section 482 of Code—Appellate Court in exercise of its power under Section 389(1) of Code can also stay order of conviction and High Court in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of Code can also stay conviction if power was not to be found in Section 389(1) of Code. (Para 21)
Representation of the People Act, 1951—Section 8(4)—Disqualification to contest election—Sitting members of Parliament and State Legislature who have already been convicted for any of offences mentioned in sub-sections (1), (2) and (3) of Section 8 of 1951 Act and who have filed appeals or revisions which are pending and are saved from disqualifications by virtue of sub-section (4) of Section 8 of 1951 Act should not, be affected by declaration now made by this judgment—However, if any sitting member of Parliament or a State Legislature is convicted of any of offences mentioned in sub-sections (1), (2) and (3) of Section 8 of 1951 Act and by virtue of such conviction and/or sentence suffers disqualifications mentioned in sub-sections (1), (2) and (3) of Section 8 of 1951 Act after pronouncement of this judgment, his membership of Parliament or State Legislature, will not be saved by sub-section (4) of Section 8 of 1951 Act. (Para 23)
(AIR 1953 SC 210); [(2001) 7 SCC 231]; [(2005) 1 SCC 754]; ([2007) 2 SCC 574]—Referred.
[(1878) 5 I.A. 178]; (AIR 1973 SC 1465); [(1995) 2 SCC 513;] [(2007) 1 SCC 673]; (AIR 1967 SC 1643); (AIR 1951 SC 467)—Relied.
Judgment :
A. K. PATNAIK, J.
These two writ petitions have been filed as Public Interest Litigations for mainly declaring sub-section (4) of Section 8 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 as ultra vires the Constitution.
The background facts
2. The background facts relevant for appreciating the challenge to sub-section (4) of Section 8 of the Act are that the Constituent Assembly while drafting the Constitution intended to lay down some disqualifications for persons being chosen as, and for being, a member of either House of Parliament as well as a member of the Legislative Assembly or Legislative Council of the State. Accordingly, in the Constitution which was finally adopted by the Constituent Assembly, Article 102(1) laid down the disqualifications for membership of either House of Parliament and Article 191(1) laid down the disqualifications for membership of the Legislative Assembly or Legislative Council of the State.
These two Articles are extracted here-in-below:
102. Disqualifications for membership. –(1) A person shall be disqualified for being chosen as, and for being, a member of either House of Parliament—
(a) if he holds any office of profit under the Government of India or the Government of any State, other than an office declared by Parliament by law not to disqualify its holder;
(b) if he is of unsound mind and stands so declared by a competent court;
(c) if he is an undischarged insolvent;
(d) if he is not a citizen of India, or has voluntarily acquired the citizenship of a foreign State, or is under any acknowledgment of allegiance or adherence to a foreign State;
(e) if he is so disqualified by or under any law made by Parliament. 191. Disqualifications for membership. –
(1) A person shall be disqualified for being chosen as, and for being, a member of the Legislative Assembly or Legislative Council of a State—
(a) if he holds any office of profit under the Government of India or the Government of any State specified in the First Schedule, other than an office declared by the Legislature of the State by law not to disqualify its holder;
(b) if he is of unsound mind and stands so declared by a competent court;
(c) if he is an undischarged insolvent;
(d) if he is not a citizen of India, or has voluntarily acquired the citizenship of a foreign State, or is under any acknowledgment of allegiance or adherence to a foreign State;
(e) if he is so disqualified by or under any law made by Parliament.
[Explanation.—For the purposes of this clause], a person shall not be deemed to hold an office of profit under the Government of India or the Government of any State specified in the First Schedule by reason only that he is a Minister either for the Union or for such State.
A reading of the aforesaid constitutional provisions will show that besides the disqualifications laid down in clauses (a), (b), (c) and (d), Parliament could lay down by law other disqualifications for membership of either House of Parliament or of Legislative Assembly or Legislative Council of the State. In exercise of this power conferred under Article 102(1)(e) and under Article 191(1)(e) of the Constitution, Parliament provided in Chapter-III of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (for short ‘the Act’), the disqualifications for membership of Parliament and State Legislatures. Sections 7 and 8 in Chapter-III of the Act, with which we are concerned in these writ petitions, are extracted here-in-below:
7. Definitions.—In this Chapter,—
(a) "appropriate Government" means in relation to any disqualification for being chosen as or for being a member of either House of Parliament, the Central Government, and in relation to any disqualification for being chosen as or for being a member of the Legislative Assembly or Legislative Council of a State, the State Government;
(b) "disqualified" means disqualified for being chosen as, and for being, a member of either House of Parliament or of the Legislative Assembly or Legisla
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.