In Brief
This constitutional case concerns the permissibility of courts relying on Parliamentary Standing Committee reports in judicial proceedings. Petitioners challenged vaccine approvals granted by drug regulators and cited a 72nd Parliamentary Standing Committee report. The Court held that such reports may not be tendered as evidence to establish factual scores. Allowing judicial adjudication on contested Parliamentary reports would risk breaching parliamentary privilege and constitutional balance between institutions (Articles 105, 121, 122). However, given the substantial constitutional law involved, the Court referred two questions to a Constitution Bench under Article 145(3) to definitively determine whether, and under what restrictions, courts may reference Parliamentary Standing Committee reports in litigation."
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.