The Supreme Court (SC) on January 3 ruled that the statement made by a minister, including MLAs and MPs, cannot be attributed vicariously to the government even when applying the principle of collective responsibility.
What was the case?
- The decision came on the Kaushal Kishor v the State of Uttar Pradesh case which, relates to the Bulandshahar rape incident of 2016.
- The then Minister of the State of Uttar Pradesh and Samajwadi Party leader Azam Khan had termed the incident a ‘political conspiracy and nothing else’.
- The survivors had filed a petition before the apex court seeking action against Khan.
Court’s observations
- A five-judge Constitution bench, headed by Justice S A Nazeer and comprising Justices B R Gavai, A S Bopanna, V Ramasubramanian and Justice B V Nagarathna, gave the decision.
- The SC said no additional restrictions against free speech can be imposed except those mentioned under Article 19(2) of the Constitution, which follows Article 19.
- The apex court said while citizens had the right to petition the Court for violations of Article 19 (freedom of expression) and Article 21 (right to life), a statement made by the Minister, inconsistent with the rights of the citizens, may not by itself be actionable.
- But if it leads to omission or commission of offence by a public official, then remedies can be sought against it.
- The court further said that the Prime Minister or the Chief Minister does not have disciplinary control over the members of the Council of Ministers… in a country like ours, where there is a multi-party system and where coalition Governments are often formed, it is not possible at all times for a Prime Minister/Chief Minister to take the whip whenever a statement is made by someone in the Council of Ministers.
- In a separate opinion, Justice Nagarathna differed with the leading judgment on the point, saying a Minister’s statement, if traceable to any affairs of the State or for protecting the government, can be attributed vicariously to the government by invoking the principle of collective responsibility, “so long as such statement represented the view of the government too”.
Article 19 (1)(a) of the Constitution
Article 19 ( 1 )(a) of the Indian Constitution guarantees to all its citizens including media “the right to freedom of speech and expression”.
Clause (2) of Article 19, at the same time provides: “nothing in sub-clause (a) of clause (1 ) shall affect the operation of any existing law, or prevent the State from making any law, in so far as such law imposes reasonable restrictions on the exercise of the right conferred by the said sub-clause in the interest of:-
a) Sovereignty and Integrity of India.
b) The Security of the State.
c) Friendly relations with foreign states.
d) Public order.
e) Decency or Morality.
f) Contempt of Court.
g) Defamation.
h) Incitement to an offence.
