SC quashes expulsion of RJD legislator Sunil Kumar Singh from Bihar House

The Supreme Court on Tuesday set aside Opposition Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) legislator Sunil Kumar Singh’s expulsion from the Bihar legislative council, saying the punishment was “excessive” and “disproportionate” even as it underscored the necessity for lawmakers to exhibit restraint and maintain decorum in their conduct given their influential roles in a democracy.

Singh was expelled from the House in July 2024 over allegedly derogatory remarks against Bihar chief minister Nitish Kumar during a heated exchange. A bench of justices Surya Kant and N Kotiswar Singh said the legislator’s conduct was “abhorrent” and “unbecoming of a legislator” but the punishment was disproportionate and needed to be interfered with. It added the punishment ought to be modified as per the extraordinary power of the Supreme Court under the Constitution’s Article 142 to do complete justice.

The court said that the legislator’s period of expulsion would be treated as suspension for his misdemeanour. It added he would not be entitled to any pecuniary benefits during this period.

The Bihar legislative council justified the expulsion citing the legislator’s repeated misconduct and defiance. The House ethics committee recommended his removal, saying the legislator insulted Kumar by mimicking him and questioning the competence of the panel’s members. His alleged refusal to attend committee meetings or express regret contributed to the council’s decision.

Sunil Kumar Singh, considered close to RJD chief Lalu Prasad Yadav, has been a vocal critic of the Nitish Kumar-led ruling dispensation. The motion for his expulsion was passed on February 13, 2024, a day after the ethics committee submitted its report. In contrast, another RJD legislator, Mohd Qari Sohaib, who was accused of disruptive behaviour on the same day, was only suspended for two days after issuing an apology.

Senior advocate Ranjit Kumar, representing the council, argued that Sunil Kumar Singh’s removal followed due process and was necessary to uphold legislative discipline. The council cited the legislator’s alleged history of misconduct and said his actions undermined the dignity of the House.

Sunil Kumar Singh’s counsel, senior advocates Abhishek Manu Singhvi and Gopal Sankaranarayanan, challenged the proportionality of the punishment. They pointed out that other legislators, including Sohaib, received lesser penalties for similar offenses.

Sunil Kumar Singh’s legal team cited his statements claiming he merely reiterated public opinions about the Bihar chief minister being a “Palturam” (a term suggesting political flip-flopping), rather than making a personal attack.

The Supreme Court found merit in the legislator’s argument that his punishment was excessive compared to past precedents. It acknowledged the importance of maintaining discipline within legislative bodies, underlining that expulsions should not be wielded arbitrarily or disproportionately.

In its final order, the court nixed an Election Commission of India notification for holding a by-election for Sunil Kumar Singh’s position.