The Supreme Court on Friday asked suspended Aam Aadmi Party lawmaker Raghav Chadha to meet Rajya Sabha chairperson Jagdeep Dhankhar and tender an unconditional apology to him over the select committee row, and said the latter may consider it 'sympathetically'.
A bench comprising Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud and justices J B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra noted the submissions of lawyer Shadan Farasat, appearing for the Rajya Sabha MP from Punjab, that the first-time and youngest lawmaker from 'the house of elders' was willing to apologise to the vice president.
'Lawyer Shadan Farasat says that he (Chadha) is the youngest member in Rajya Sabha. Bearing in mind that he has no intention to affect dignity of the house of which he is a member, Mr Farasat submits that petitioner will seek an appointment with the chairperson (of the Rajya Sabha) so that he may place an unconditional apology which may be considered sympathetically,' the bench noted in its order.
The bench adjourned the hearing on the plea of Chadha, who has challenged his indefinite suspension from the Rajya Sabha, for hearing after Diwali vacation and asked Attorney General R Venkataramani to apprise it of the developments in the matter then.
During the brief hearing, the bench observed that on the last date of hearing, it had said if Chadha was willing to tender an apology, then the chairperson, who is a very distinguished person and a senior constitutional functionary, may take an 'objective view'.
The attorney general and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta agreed to the suggestion. The bench then sought the views of Chadha's counsel.
"You have already apologised six times. But would you be willing to seek an appointment with the chairperson and meet the chairperson, tender an apology?" the bench asked.
"He is the youngest member in the house of elders. Of course, he doesn't mind tendering an apology..," the counsel for Chadha said, adding the apology will not be in prejudice to his legal submissions raised in the pending plea.
Chadha has been under suspension since August 11 after some MPs, a majority from the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party, accused him of adding their names to a motion without their consent. The motion sought constitution of a select committee to examine the contentious Delhi Services Bill.
It was alleged that the Rajya Sabha MP had moved a motion to refer the Delhi Services Bill to the select committee. He had allegedly named some lawmakers as members of the proposed committee and it was claimed that some of the MPs had not given their consent for it.
Taking note of the complaint, the chairman suspended Chadha, pending an inquiry by the Committee of Privileges.
Earlier, the CJI-led bench had said indefinite suspension of an MP could have very serious repercussions for people's right to be represented by a person of their choice. It had asked whether the Privileges Committee of Parliament could order Chadha's suspension from the Rajya Sabha for an unspecified duration.
The top court had said the exclusion of a member of the opposition from the House, just because of a perspective which may not be consistent with the viewpoint of the government, is a serious issue.
It had said the only charge against Chadha was that he did not seek permission of some MPs before deciding to include them in a proposed select committee, and sought to know from the attorney general if it could be considered an infraction warranting indefinite suspension.
Senior advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, appearing for Chadha, had said there have been at least 11 such incidents in the Rajya Sabha in the past when members have objected to their inclusion in select committees proposed by other members.
He had said whenever a member declined consent they were dropped from the list and no punitive action was ever taken against the MP who proposed the name.
The top court had earlier taken note of Dwivedi's submissions that the case raised an important 'national issue' and noted as many as seven issues for adjudication.
'Whether by an admixture of a resolution of the House and an order of the Chairperson under Rules 256 and 266, there is any jurisdiction to suspend a Member of Parliament pending an enquiry,' read one of the issues.
'Whether such an order could be passed after the matter was referred to the Committee on Privileges based on the same grounds for examination, investigation and report,' read the other.
Another issue the bench noted was whether Rule 256 and Rule 266 (discretionary powers of RS chairman) empower the Chairman of the Rajya Sabha to pass an order of suspension pending an inquiry.
In his plea, the AAP leader said the power to suspend indefinitely is dangerously open to excesses and abuse.
'The power to suspend is meant only to be used as a shield and not as a sword, that is, it cannot be penal,' the plea has said, adding 'the suspension is in clear breach of Rule 256 of the Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in the Council of States, which incorporates a categorical prohibition against the suspension of any member for a period exceeding the remainder of the session'.
The Rajya Sabha had passed a motion moved by the Leader of the House Piyush Goyal on August 11 seeking action against the AAP MP. Chadha was suspended on the last day of the Monsoon session for 'gross violation of rules, misconduct, defiant attitude and contemptuous conduct', pending a report by the Privileges Committee.
