'Even While Dissenting, One Must Be Respectful' : Supreme Court While Hearing RJD MLC's Plea Against Expulsion Over Remark On Nitish Kumar

During the hearing of Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) MLC Sunil Singh's plea against his expulsion from Bihar legislative council for allegedly using defamatory words against State's Chief Minister Nitish Kumar, Justice Surya Kant of the Supreme Court cautioned today that "even while dissenting, one must be disrespectful". 

The matter was before a bench of Justices Kant and N Kotiswar Singh, which will next hear it on January 9.

During the hearing, counsels for petitioner-Sunil Kumar Singh, including Senior Advocate Dr Abhishek Manu Singhvi, informed that Legislative Council elections have been notified in the state and as such, an application for stay has been filed for stay thereof (for the purpose of which the matter was listed today). "Till the matter attains finality in Supreme Court, how can a new candidate come in?" asked Singhvi, referring to certain judgments.

When the bench queried as to when the main case is listed, the counsels informed that the next date is January 21, however, the elections are scheduled for January 23. Considering, Justice Kant remarked that if the elections are not deferred, the matter would become infructuous.

Subsequently, it was argued on Singh's behalf that the allegation in the case pertains to the use of only one word (Palturam) in respect of Nitish Kumar, which was used by Singh's colleague as well but only Singh was permanently expelled (while the colleague was suspended) - an action that the Supreme Court has earlier frowned upon. "If this leads to expulsion, we will empty the House of Opposition members!", Singhvi commented.

When Justice Kant concurred that the allegation is centred around use of one word, Senior Advocate Ranjit Kumar (for respondents) objected, saying that there was also use of caricature on video. "This is how humor works in politics", responded the judge in a lighter vein, however, it was added that it is the hallmark of Parliamentary proceedings that one must be respectful.

Background

The alleged incident happened during the budget session that took place in February, 2024. The expulsion was made on the basis of a recommendation made by the Ethics Committee of the council. Amongst the accusations against Singh were calling the Chief Minister Palturam and imitating him.

The recommendation of the committee, inter-alia, stated:

“As the Chief Whip of the Opposition, his legislative Responsibility should be more towards the policies, rules and constitutional authority of the House. But he did not follow this in his conduct and behaviour. His efforts to come to the well of the House and raise unrestrained slogans, disrupt the House, disobey the Chair's direction, and insult the Leader of the House by using defamatory and rude words have hurt the dignity of the Upper House.”

“Under clause 10 (d) of Rule 290 of the Bihar Legislative Council's Procedure and Conduct of Business Rules, the Committee recommends unanimously/majority that Dr. Sunil Kumar Singh be relieved from the membership of the Bihar Legislative Council.”

Against the above projection, Singh filed the present writ petition before the Supreme Court seeking to quash the report as illegal and unconstitutional. Further, he sought a direction for not declaring an election pursuant to vacancy arising notification.

In August, 2024, the Supreme Court issued notice on the petition but refused to pass any interim order.

Case Details: SUNIL KUMAR SINGH v. BIHAR LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL AND ORS., W.P.(C) No. 530/2024