Did you know that up until now, the Article 361 of the Constitution shielded the President and Governor from criminal prosecution and barred any judicial scrutiny of their actions? Yes, it is true. However, the Supreme Court on July 19 has agreed to hear a plea seeking to redefine the contours of constitutional immunity enjoyed by the Governor of the state.
Let us understand what is the matter all about? Recently, a petition was moved by a contractual women employee of the West Bengal Raj Bhawan alleging sexual harassment by Governor C. V. Ananda Bose. The Article 361 of the Constitution states that the President or the Governor of the state shall not be answerable to any court for the exercise and performance of the powers and duties of his office or for any act done or purporting to be done by him in the exercise.
In simple words, it states that no criminal proceedings whatsoever shall be instituted or continued. No process for the arrest or imprisonment can take place while the President or the Governor holds office.
Citing this very law, the Supreme Court in 2017 delayed the trial against the then Rajasthan Gov. Kalyan Singh, who was one of the accused in a criminal case. This case in 2017 was state vs. Kalyan Singh and others which was concerning the Babri Masjid Demolition in 1992.
The SC then said, “Kalyan Singh is entitled to immunity under the Article 361 of the Constitution as long as he remains Governor of Rajasthan. The Court of Sessions will frame charges and move against him as soon as he ceases to be the Governor”.
The debate on whether executive immunity is a blanket protection has been taking place in other countries as well. In Indian context too, this discussion has to be viewed in the larger context of the tussle between the office of the Governor and the government’s in opposition -ruled states.
The case likely to heard next in August this Year.
