LexDR. SUNIL KUMAR SINGH versus BIHAR LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL (THROUGH SECRETARY) AND ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2025] 2 S.C.R. 2130 : 2025 INSC 264 Dr. Sunil Kumar Singh v. Bihar Legislative Council (Through Secretary) and Ors. (Writ Petition (Civil) No. 530 of 2024) 25 February 2025 [Surya Kant* and Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh, JJ.] Issue for Consideration (1) Whether the instant writ petition is maintainable in view of Article 212 (1) of the Constitution of India and whether the proceedings of the ethics committee are amenable to judicial review? (2) Whether this court can review the proportionality of the punishment imposed by the house in exercise of its writ jurisdiction? (3) If so, whether the petitioner’s expulsion is disproportionate to the misconduct attributed to him and whether it merits any interference? (4) If so, whether this court is empowered to determine the quantum of punishment that may be imposed on the petitioner? Headnotes† Constitution of India – Art.212(1) – Whether the instant Writ Petition is maintainable in view of Art.212(1) of the Constitution of India and whether the proceedings of the Ethics Committee are amenable to judicial review: Held: The protection u/Art.212(1) operates only with respect to the ‘Proceedings in the Legislature’ on the grounds of ‘Procedural Irregularities’ – It could not have been the intent of the lawmakers to circumscribe Constitutional Courts unconditionally from scrutinising the validity of the actions of the Legislature, which may encroach upon the Fundamental Rights of the members and/or citizens – The ‘Proceedings in the Legislature’ comprise the formal steps, debates, and motions undertaken to facilitate deliberations within the House – Art. 212(1) of the Constitution provides immunity for the manner of such proceedings, and hence, Constitutional Courts would exercise restraint when such proceedings are called into question on the grounds of procedural irregularity – A ‘Legislative Decision’, on the other hand, is the culmination of the legislative procedure—the formal expression of the will of the House on a given * Author [2025] 2 S.C.R. 2131 Dr. Sunil Kumar Singh v. Bihar Legislative Council (Through Secretary) and Ors. matter – These decisions of the Legislature, though emanating from a coordinate branch of Government, are not immune from scrutiny by Constitutional Courts – In the instant case, the Impugned Report recommending the expulsion of the Petitioner was made by the Ethics Committee in the discharge of its administrative functions – The present action of the Ethics Committee is purely administrative in nature, aimed at enforcing discipline and ethical standards amongst the members of the House – It is well established that administrative actions, even when undertaken by legislative bodies or their committees, are subject to judicial review where they affect the rights and interests of individuals – In this context, the present action resulting in civil consequences for the Petitioner, cannot be immune from judicial review under the pretext of legislative privilege. [Paras 11, 13, 14, 17, 19, 21] Punishment – Proportionality of punishment – Can the Courts examine the proportionality of punishment imposed on a member while reviewing the validity of the action taken by the House: Held: The doctrine of proportionality is fundamentally embedded in the concept of fairness in action across domestic, foreign, and international legal systems – This principle ensures that measures taken are appropriate, necessary, and balanced in relation to the objectives they seek to achieve – There is no absolute bar on the Constitutional Courts to examine the proportionality of the punishment imposed on a member while reviewing the validity of the action taken by the House – By focusing on the proportionality of punishment, courts must ensure that justice aligns with constitutional values and societal norms, thereby upholding the integrity of the democratic process – At this point, it must be added that the determination of what constitutes a disproportionate measure is inherently complex and context-dependent – Such assessment requires a nuanced scrutiny of the specific circumstances surrounding each case – This means that a one-size-fits-all definition is impractical while adjudicating proportionality and the courts must exercise their discretion in a prudent and judicious manner. [Paras 54, 62, 63] Punishment – Proportionality of punishment – Guiding principles for courts to consider while scrutinising the pr
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.