The Supreme Court indicated on Monday, October 5, that it may leave the wider constitutional questions about legislative privilege and freedom of expression undecided for now. The change in approach followed the Tamil Nadu Assembly’s submission that the 2003 resolution underlying the long-pending case had been withdrawn in 2004.
Senior advocate Raju Ramachandran, representing the Assembly, brought the withdrawal to a bench led by Chief Justice Surya Kant. He questioned whether the original dispute still required a decision and said the withdrawal had not been reflected in the referral. The bench asked him to place the resolution before the seven-judge Constitution Bench.
The Chief Justice suggested that a dispute without a surviving cause could be closed while keeping the constitutional questions open for another case. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta agreed that the proceedings might have become academic. Senior advocate Kapil Sibal stressed the continuing importance of the broader questions, even if the original controversy no longer survived.
The N. Ravi case arose from the Tamil Nadu Assembly’s 2003 action against newspaper journalists over an alleged breach of privilege. It developed into a reference about the relationship between legislatures’ privileges and constitutional freedoms, including speech and personal liberty. Journalists and other applicants have sought to intervene because the outcome could affect criticism and reporting about legislative institutions.
The seven-judge bench is expected to consider the position briefly on Tuesday, October 6. Monday’s remarks did not finally dispose of the reference or decide whether legislative privileges override fundamental rights. The immediate issue is whether this particular case should continue after the reported withdrawal; the larger constitutional dispute remains unresolved.