Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Oct-27-1965
Reported in : AIR1966SC657; 1966CriLJ586; 2SCR406
..... art. 102(1), he is entitled to continue to be a member of the house during its life. section 7 of the representation of the people act prescribes disqualifications for membership of parliament or of a state legislature. s. 7(b) is relevant for our purpose. it provides that a person shall be disqualified for being chosen as, and for being, a member of ..... considered this point and has held that a member of the house of the central or state legislature cannot claim as such member any immunity from arrest under the preventive detention act. dealing with the argument that a member of parliament cannot, by reason of his detention, be prevented from exercising his rights as such member, harries, c.j. observed that if this argument is ..... a challenge, it cannot be said to be barred, because such a challenge is not covered by the presidential order at all. 7. in makhan singh tarsikka v. the state of punjab : 1964crilj217 a special bench of this court has had occasion to consider the effect of the proclamation of emergency issued by the president and the presidential order with which we ..... thus raised was referred to the committee of privileges for its report. on the 9th july, 1952, the report made by the said committee was submitted to the house. the majority view of the committee was that the arrest of mr. deshpande under the preventive detention act did not constitute a breach of the privilege of the house. in coming to this conclusion .....Tag this Judgment!