Pandit M.S.M. Sharma vs Dr. Shree Krishna Sinha and Others (1960)

Case Summary: Pandit M.S.M. Sharma vs Dr. Shree Krishna Sinha and Others (1960)

Case Stats

Court	Supreme Court of India
Case No.	Writ Petition (Civil) 176 of 1956
Date of Decision	01-08-1960
Bench	Full Bench
Hon'ble Judges	B. P. Sinha, C.J; Syed Jaffer Imam, J; P. B. Gajendragadkar, J; K. Subba Rao, J; K. N. Wanchoo, J; K. C. Das Gupta, J; J. C. Shah, J; A. K. Sarkar, J
Acts Referred	Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Section 11; Constitution of India — Articles 19(1), 194(3), 21, 212, 32
Citations	AIR 1960 SC 1186; (1961) 1 SCR 96
Advocates	Basudeva Prasad, M.K. Ramamurthi, K.N. Keshwa, R. Mahalingier, Lal Narain Sinha, B.K.P. Sinha, L.S. Sinha, S.P. Varma
Final Decision	Dismissed — Principles of res judicata applied; legislative privilege upheld

[Judgment Source] https://www.courtkutchehry.com/Judgement/Search/AdvancedV2?docid=282218

Facts of the Case

The petitioner, editor of the English daily 'Searchlight', published a report of Bihar Legislative Assembly proceedings of May 30, 1957. The Assembly claimed breach of privilege and initiated action. Sharma challenged the proceedings multiple times under Article 32, arguing his fundamental right to publish accurate reports of legislative debates under Article 19(1)(a) outweighed legislative privilege under Article 194(3). Earlier petitions had been dismissed by the Supreme Court, upholding legislative powers similar to the House of Commons.

Law Points Raised

• Whether Article 194(3) privileges override citizens’ Article 19(1)(a) rights.
• Applicability of res judicata to repeated writ petitions on the same issue.
• Whether legislative procedure can be challenged in courts under Article 212.
• Effect of prorogation on pending breach of privilege proceedings.

Acts / Provisions / Articles Referred

• Constitution of India — Arts. 19(1), 194(3), 21, 212, 32
• Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Section 11 (Res judicata)

Judgments Referred

• M.S.M. Sharma v. Sri Krishna Sinha [1959] Supp. 1 SCR 806 (first petition)
• General principles of res judicata as applied beyond CPC (land acquisition cases).

Obiter Dicta

Legislative privilege to control publication of proceedings exists until defined by law. Courts will not interfere in internal legislative procedure unless there is a complete lack of jurisdiction.

Ratio Decidendi

Once the Supreme Court has adjudicated an issue after full contest, the principle of res judicata bars reopening it. Legislative privilege under Article 194(3) permits restricting publication of proceedings. Courts cannot question procedural irregularities within the Legislature due to Article 212.

Final Ruling

Petition dismissed. No fundamental right under Article 19(1)(a) was being infringed; earlier decision bound the parties. Legislature entitled to proceed for breach of privilege, even after prorogations.

Summary

The Supreme Court reaffirmed that legislative privileges under Article 194(3) prevail over citizens’ Article 19(1)(a) rights to publish legislative proceedings unless defined otherwise by law. The petitioner’s repeated challenges were barred by res judicata. Courts cannot interfere in internal legislative procedure under Article 212, and prorogation does not terminate breach of privilege proceedings.