KALPANA MEHTA AND OTHERS versus UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

Citation: [2017] 4 S.C.R. 477 · Decided: 05-04-2017 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: DIPAK MISRA · Disposal: Matter referred to larger bench
cites 12 · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

(2017) 4 S.C.R. 477 
KALPANA MEHTA AND OTHERS 
v. 
UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS 
(Writ Petition (Civil) No. 558 of 2012) 
APRIL 05, 2017 
[DIPAK MISRA AND R. F. NARIMAN, JJ.] 
Constitution of India: 
A 
B 
Arts. 32, 136, 105, 121, 122 and 145(3) - Reference io or 
reliance on Parliamentary Standing Committee Report - By Supreme C 
Court- In exercise o.fjurisdiction u/Arts. 32 and 136 -·Permissibility 
- Question referred to Cn11stitution Bench. 
Referring the matter to the Constitution Bench, the Court 
HELD: 1. The procedure of the Parliamentary Standing 
Committee is neither inquisitorial nor adjudicative. It has its own 
D 
character. The procedure is sui generis. In the Westminister 
system, Parliament also deals with the matter of accountability of 
the executive and Standing Committees of Parliament, on many 
an occasion, examine the propriety and wisdom of the conduct of 
the executive. The reports of the Committees arc for the 
assistance of Parliament. The procedure for drawing up such 
reports, is entirely a matter for the Committee and it has authority 
to receive evidence from witnesses - but it is for their own 
assistance. No person has a right to be heard by the Committee 
even if the Committee is examining a matter which may result in 
an adverse comment on the conduct of such person. The principles 
of natural justice are not applicable. [Para 20][490-H; 491-A-C] 
2. The reference to Constituent Assembly debates, reports 
of the Parliamentary Standing Committee and the speeches made 
in the Parliament or for that matter, debates held in Parliament 
E 
F 
are only meant for understanding the Constitution or the G 
legislation, as the case may be. It is quite different than to place 
reliance upon Parliamentary Standing Committee Report as a piece 
of evidence to establish a fact. As the Constituent Assembly 
debates are referred to for interpretation of a constitutional 
477 
H 
478 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2017] 4 S.C.R. 
A provision and especially to understand the context, similarly 
judicial notice of parliamentary proceedings can be taken note of 
for the purpose of appreciating the intention of the legislature. 
[Paras 32, 38](494-B-C; 496-B-C] 
B 
' c 
D 
'E 
F 
G 
H 
Raja Ram Pal v. Hon 'ble Speaker, Lok Sabha and others 
[2007] 1 SCR 317: (2007) 3 SCC 184; Krishan Lal 
Gera v. State of Haryana and others (2011] 7 SCR 722 
.: (2011) 10 SCC 529; A.K. Roy v. Union of lndia and 
others (1982] 2 SCR 272 : (1982) 1 SCC 271; MS.M 
Sharma v. Dr. Shree Krishna Sinha and Others AIR 
1960 SC 1186; Sarojini Ramaswami v. Union of India 
and others [1992] 1 Suppl. SCR 108: (1992) 4 SCC 
506; Arun Kumar Agrawal v. Union of India and others 
(2013] 3 SCR 508 : (2013) 7 SCC l; Indra Sawhney 
v. Union of India [1992) 2 Suppl. SCR 454: (1992) 3 
Suppl. SCC 217; Madh11 Limaye, In re (1969) 
3 SCR 154 : (1969) 1 SCC 292; Union of India v. 
Harbhajan Sinhg Dhillon [1972] 2 SCR 33 : (1971) 
2 SCC 779; Kesavananda Bharati Sripadagalvaru v. 
State of Kerala and another (1973] Suppl. SCR 1 : 
(1973) 4 SCC 225; Mano} Narula v. Union of 
India [2014] 9 SCR 965 : (2014) 9 SCC 1; Jyoti 
Harshad Mehta and others v. Custodian and others 
[2009] 12SCR1229: (2009) 10 SCC 564; State of W.R. 
v. Union of India 1963 AIR 1241 : [1964] SCR 371; 
K.P Varghese v. Income-tax Officer, Ernakulam and 
another [1982) 1SCR629: (1981) 4 SCC 173; 
Ramesh Yeshwant Prabhoo v. Prabhakar Kashinath 
Kunte [1995) 6 Suppl. SCR 371 : (1996) 1 SCC 130; 
Novartis AG v. 
Union of India [2013] 
13 
SCR 148: (2013) 6 SCC 1; Siale of MP. v. Dadabhoy's 
New Chirimiri Ponri Hill Collie1y Co. (P) Ltd. [1972) 2 
SCR 609 : (1972) 1 SCC 298; Union of India v. Slee! 
Stock Holders' Syndicate [1976) 3 SCR 504: (1976) 
3 SCC 108; Surana Steels (P) Ltd. v. CIT [19991 
2 SCR 589 : (1999) 4 SCC 306; State Bank of India 
through General Manager v. National Housing Bank 
and others (2013) 16 sec 538 - referred to. 
KALPANA MEHTA AND OTHERS v. UNION OF INDIA AND 
479 
OTHERS 
R. v. Secretary of State for Trade and others ex parte 
A 
Anderson Strathclyde pie [1983] 2 All ER 233 -
referred to. 
3. As per Article 105(2) of the Constitution, no member of 
the Parliament can be made liable for any proceeding in any court 
because of what he has stated in a committee. The Parliamentary B 
Standing Committee is a committee constituted under the Rules 
and what a member speaks over there, is absolutely within the 
domain of that Committee. Freedom of speech of a member of a 
Com
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.