Bengaluru: The high court Friday dismissed BJP MLC CT Ravi‘s petition challenging the proceedings over the alleged use of an unparliamentary word against minister Laxmi Hebbalkar inside the legislature at Suvarna Soudha, Belagavi, in Dec last year.
Abusing a woman legislator in the legislature “has no nexus to the functioning of the House nor has a nexus to the transaction of business in the House”, Justice M Nagaprasanna observed in his order, adding, “No nexus; no privilege”.

“In the grand tapestry or the labyrinth of democracy, the privilege of legislative speech is a vital thread. Therefore, it must be woven with the fibres of responsibility and ethical conduct. The legislature is an exalted forum for deliberation, not a forum for personal vilification. While this court will always remain the sentinel of legislative autonomy, it cannot permit the invocation of privilege to stymie the imperatives of justice. The distinction sought to be drawn between the spoken word and overt physical actions within the house is a tenuous one. The legislature is not a sanctuary for defamation or gendered invective, but rather an institution where robust debate must be tempered with decorum and respect. I find neither in the alleged acts of the petitioner,” the judge added.
It was contended on behalf of Ravi that a speech of any kind is completely immune to judicial action and allowing criminal prosecution in such a matter would open Pandora’s box as every legislator could knock on the door of constitutional courts alleging defamation.
On the other hand, the state govt argued that there is no such absolute immunity available to a legislator.
However, negating Ravi’s argument, Justice Nagaprasanna noted that as the abusive word against the woman lawmaker on the floor of the legislature not only prima facie outrages her modesty but sullies the sanctity of the House.
On whether such a word is immune to any action, the judge stated: “The unequivocal and emphatic answer is a ‘no’. The alleged word spoken, if spoken, or gesture made, if made, against a woman, certainly outrages her modesty and, above all, can have no nexus to the functioning of the House or no relation to a transaction of business of the House,” the judge observed in his order.
Whether the petitioner has spoken the abusive word against the complainant or used gestures which would demean her dignity has to be investigated, the judge said and added: “Criminal acts inside the House are not immune from prosecution. In the case at hand, it is still under investigation.”