Article 122

Article 122 of the Constitution of India safeguards the autonomy and independence of the Parliament by insulating its internal proceedings from judicial interference. It ensures that the legislative branch functions independently, free from external challenges or scrutiny by the judiciary, thereby upholding the constitutional doctrine of separation of powers.
This provision preserves the sanctity of parliamentary privilege and ensures that the courts do not intervene in matters that pertain purely to the internal procedures of the legislature, except in cases of constitutional transgressions.

Constitutional Framework and Objective

Article 122 is located within Part V, Chapter II of the Constitution, which deals with the Parliament. It provides legislative immunity from judicial review regarding procedural irregularities in parliamentary proceedings.
The primary objective of this provision is to maintain the institutional independence of the legislature and to prevent the judiciary from intruding into the day-to-day functioning of Parliament. It ensures that both Houses of Parliament — the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha — are free to conduct their business according to their own rules and conventions, as provided under Article 118.
This protection is essential for the efficient, orderly, and sovereign functioning of Parliament as the supreme law-making body of the nation.

Clause (1): Validity of Parliamentary Proceedings

Article 122(1) states:

“The validity of any proceedings in Parliament shall not be called in question on the ground of any alleged irregularity of procedure.”

This clause provides immunity from judicial scrutiny for any alleged procedural irregularities in parliamentary proceedings. It means that once a proceeding takes place within Parliament — such as the passage of a Bill, debate, motion, or resolution — the courts cannot examine its validity based on claims of procedural error or deviation from parliamentary rules.
The term “proceedings in Parliament” covers every formal act of Parliament, including:

• Introduction and passage of Bills,
• Debates and discussions,
• Voting and resolutions,
• Decisions of presiding officers (Speaker or Chairman).

However, this immunity applies only to procedural irregularities, not to constitutional violations. Courts may intervene if Parliament’s actions contravene explicit constitutional provisions or infringe fundamental rights.
For example, if a Bill passed by Parliament violates the basic structure of the Constitution, it can still be struck down by the judiciary, as established in Keshavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973).

Clause (2): Protection of Parliamentary Officers and Members

Article 122(2) provides:

“No officer or member of Parliament in whom powers are vested by or under this Constitution for regulating procedure or the conduct of business, or for maintaining order in Parliament, shall be subject to the jurisdiction of any court in respect of the exercise by him of those powers.”

This clause protects the Speaker of the Lok Sabha, the Chairman of the Rajya Sabha, and other parliamentary officers or members exercising procedural authority from judicial scrutiny.
The purpose of this immunity is to enable them to:

• Regulate parliamentary proceedings effectively.
• Maintain order and discipline in the House.
• Make procedural rulings without fear of legal repercussions.

However, this protection is not absolute immunity. It applies only to actions taken in the discharge of official parliamentary duties and not to acts outside the scope of parliamentary functions.

Key Concepts

• Parliamentary Privilege: Article 122 grants Parliament and its members special privileges and immunities necessary for the free and effective discharge of their legislative duties. These privileges, derived from the British parliamentary tradition, are essential for maintaining the sovereignty of Parliament within its sphere.
• Legislative Immunity: The Article embodies legislative immunity, shielding Parliament’s internal procedures from judicial examination. This prevents frequent litigation and preserves the finality of parliamentary decisions.
• Separation of Powers: The provision reinforces the constitutional doctrine that the legislature, executive, and judiciary must function independently within their respective domains.

Judicial Interpretation and Case Law

The Supreme Court of India has clarified the scope and limitations of Article 122 through several landmark judgments:

• Keshav Singh v. Union of India (1965):The Court upheld the principle of parliamentary privilege and declared that the validity of parliamentary proceedings cannot be questioned on grounds of procedural irregularity. However, it clarified that gross illegality or unconstitutionality could still invite judicial scrutiny.
• Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain (1975):The Supreme Court discussed the limits of judicial review in matters relating to parliamentary proceedings. It reiterated that while Parliament enjoys procedural immunity, acts violating constitutional mandates are open to judicial intervention.
• R. S. Nayak v. A. R. Antulay (1984):The Court observed that legislative autonomy is fundamental to parliamentary democracy. Judicial review cannot extend to evaluating how Parliament conducts its business unless there is a clear constitutional breach.

These rulings collectively establish that Article 122 grants procedural immunity but not constitutional impunity to Parliament.

Significance of Article 122

Article 122 plays a vital role in the constitutional balance of power and the effective functioning of democracy. Its significance lies in:

1. Ensuring Legislative Autonomy:It empowers Parliament to conduct its business independently, free from external interference.
2. Maintaining Institutional Harmony:It prevents judicial overreach into legislative matters, upholding mutual respect among the three branches of government.
3. Protecting Parliamentary Functionaries:It safeguards presiding officers and members from personal liability for their official actions in the House.
4. Preserving the Dignity of the Legislature:It reinforces Parliament’s authority as the supreme representative body of the people.
5. Preventing Judicial Micromanagement:It prevents courts from being drawn into procedural disputes that are inherently political or internal to the legislature.

Limitations of Article 122

While Article 122 provides substantial immunity, it is not absolute. Judicial review remains permissible in certain exceptional cases:

• Violation of Constitutional Provisions: Courts can intervene if parliamentary actions contravene any explicit provision of the Constitution.
• Violation of Fundamental Rights: Judicial review is available if an act of Parliament infringes upon citizens’ fundamental rights under Part III.
• Acts Beyond Parliamentary Competence: If Parliament exceeds its constitutional authority or jurisdiction, courts can declare such actions ultra vires.

For instance, in Raja Ram Pal v. Hon’ble Speaker, Lok Sabha (2007), the Supreme Court held that judicial review is available in cases of substantive illegality or unconstitutionality, even in matters relating to parliamentary privileges.

Related Constitutional Articles

Article 122 must be understood in relation to other provisions safeguarding legislative privilege and autonomy:

• Article 105: Defines the powers, privileges, and immunities of Parliament and its members.
• Article 194: Extends similar privileges and protections to State Legislatures.
• Article 118: Empowers each House to frame rules for regulating its own procedure and conduct of business.

Together, these provisions form the constitutional basis for parliamentary sovereignty within its sphere, ensuring that the legislature functions independently while remaining accountable to the Constitution.

Practical Implications

In practice, Article 122 ensures that:

• Parliamentary proceedings, including the passage of Bills or motions, cannot be invalidated by courts on minor procedural grounds.
• Speakers and presiding officers can maintain order and discipline without fear of litigation.
• Parliament can carry out its functions efficiently without interruptions arising from judicial scrutiny of internal matters.

However, by allowing judicial intervention in cases of constitutional violations, the article also ensures that Parliament remains subordinate to the Constitution, not above it.

Constitutional and Democratic Importance

Article 122 upholds the delicate equilibrium of checks and balances envisaged by the framers of the Constitution. It guarantees legislative freedom while ensuring constitutional supremacy. This dual safeguard allows Parliament to function as an independent legislative body without compromising the rule of law.
By preventing courts from inquiring into procedural irregularities, yet permitting intervention in cases of constitutional transgressions, Article 122 maintains both legislative dignity and constitutional accountability.

Conclusion

Article 122 is a fundamental provision ensuring that Parliament’s proceedings remain free from unwarranted judicial interference, thereby reinforcing the independence of the legislature. At the same time, it preserves the supremacy of the Constitution by allowing judicial review in cases of illegality, unconstitutionality, or violation of fundamental rights.