send mail to support@abhimanu.com mentioning your email id and mobileno registered with us! if details not recieved
Resend Opt after 60 Sec.
By Loging in you agree to Terms of Services and Privacy Policy
Claim your free MCQ
Please specify
Sorry for the inconvenience but we’re performing some maintenance at the moment. Website can be slow during this phase..
Please verify your mobile number
Login not allowed, Please logout from existing browser
Please update your name
Subscribe to Notifications
Stay updated with the latest Current affairs and other important updates regarding video Lectures, Test Schedules, live sessions etc..
Your Free user account at abhipedia has been created.
Remember, success is a journey, not a destination. Stay motivated and keep moving forward!
Refer & Earn
Enquire Now
My Abhipedia Earning
Kindly Login to view your earning
Support
Type your modal answer and submitt for approval
Consider the following statements:
1. Article 105 of the Constitution deals with the powers of the Houses of Parliament against a defamation suit.
2. The protection under Article 105 does not extend to the Attorney General of India and non-members of the House of Parliament.
3. The Supreme Court held that parliamentarians are entitled to immunity from criminal prosecution when it comes to their speech and votes in the House.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
Only one
Only two
All three
None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct: Article 105 grants certain privileges and immunities to MPs, which are essential for the effective functioning of the legislature. These privileges include freedom of speech and voting in Parliament without interference from any court or authority. MPs are immune from any legal proceedings in respect of anything said or any vote given by them in Parliament or its committees. This immunity ensures that legislators can express their views and cast their votes without fear of legal consequences. Statement 2 is incorrect: When issues regarding the exercise of parliamentary privileges or legal challenges related to the actions of MPs arise, the Attorney General may provide legal opinions and advice to the Speaker of the Lok Sabha (House of the People) or the Chairman of the Rajya Sabha (Council of States) as needed. Additionally, this immunity extends to certain non-members, like the Attorney General of India or a Minister who may not be a member but speaks in the House. In cases where a member oversteps or exceeds the contours of admissible free speech, the Speaker of the House will deal with it, as opposed to the court. Supplementary notes: Immunity from Bribery charges for MPs Article 105(2) states, “No member of Parliament shall be liable to any proceedings in any court in respect of anything said or any vote given by him in Parliament or any committee thereof, and no person shall be so liable in respect of the publication by or under the authority of either House of Parliament of any report, paper, votes or proceedings.” Article 194(2) extends this immunity to MLAs and states, “No member of the Legislature of a State shall be liable to any proceedings in any court in respect of anything said or any vote given by him in the Legislature or any committee thereof, and no person shall be so liable in respect of the publication by or under the authority of a House of such a Legislature of any report, paper, votes, or proceedings.”
By: Parvesh Mehta ProfileResourcesReport error
Access to prime resources
New Courses