Article 122
Limits on Judicial Scrutiny of Parliamentary Proceedings
Article 122 of the Constitution bars courts from inquiring into the validity of "proceedings in Parliament" on the ground of irregularity of procedure (Article 212 provides the corresponding bar for state legislatures). This provision protects the internal legislative process from routine judicial interference, but does not extend to quasi-judicial determinations made by the Speaker outside ordinary legislative business.
- Article 122(1): the validity of any proceedings in Parliament cannot be called in question on the ground of alleged irregularity of procedure
- The Supreme Court has clarified that this bar applies to procedural irregularities in law-making and internal House business, not to substantive illegality or constitutional violations
- In Kihoto Hollohan v. Zachillhu (1992), the Court held that the Speaker, while deciding a Tenth Schedule disqualification petition, acts as a quasi-judicial tribunal rather than in a purely legislative capacity — placing such decisions outside the Article 122 bar and within the scope of judicial review
- This distinction is what allows the Supreme Court to entertain a plea on the delay in the Speaker's decision without being barred by Article 122, since the complaint concerns a quasi-judicial function, not an internal legislative proceeding
● Tracked since May 07, 2026 · last seen August 24, 2026 · updates as the daily brief publishes
Polity & Governance
Merger Exception
Polity & Governance
Election Commission of India (Article 324)
Polity & Governance
Appointment and Removal of the Chief Election Commissioner and Election Commissioners
Polity & Governance
Anoop Baranwal v. Union of India (2023)
Polity & Governance
Article 124 and the Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Act, 1956
See it in today’s brief.
Daily current affairs with every static concept explained in place.
Read the daily brief