The Supreme Court adjourned till Friday the hearing on a petition filed by Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) lawmaker Raghav Chadha challenging his indefinite suspension from the Rajya Sabha.

A bench headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud agreed to await the decision of the Rajya Sabha secretariat in this regard after being informed by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Rajya Sabha Secretariat, that there was some development on the issue and the meeting between Chadha and RS secretariat saw discussions take place in “good faith”.

Mehta said, “The Court may keep the matter next Friday. The petitioner had met the Rajya Sabha Chairman. Some discussion has taken place in good faith. He has to appear before the privileges committee.”

The Court had on November 3 allowed Chadha to seek an appointment with Vice President Jagdeep Dhankar, who is the Chairman of Rajya Sabha, and offer unconditional apology.

Chadha had met the Rajya Sabha chairperson to offer an unconditional apology after being suspended from the House in August for an alleged breach of privilege

Advocate Shadan Farasat, appearing for Chadha, requested the matter to be taken up on Wednesday as certain timelines for submission of questions in Parliament were due for expiry. The bench, also comprising justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra said, “It is sometimes important to keep calm and read between the lines of what the Solicitor general is saying.”

On the earlier date, the Court sought a way forward after noting that Chadha was the youngest member of the August House besides being a first-time MP. The Court then asked the VP to consider the apology “sympathetically”. The matter was kept for Friday to know further status of the matter.

The 34-year-old lawmaker was accused of not obtaining the consent of five Rajya Sabha MPs before including their names in a select committee for considering the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi (Amendment) Bill 2023 that seeks to diminish the power of the elected AAP government in the Capital over services.

On a complaint by the five MPs alleging breach of privilege, the same was referred to the Privileges Committee and Chadha was suspended till the committee submitted its report.

Chadha had claimed in his petition that this is not the first time the names of members were added to the Select Committee without their consent. It was pointed out on his behalf by his lawyers that in the past 75 years, there were 11 such instances and none of the cases resulted in a case of breach of privilege. Rather, the names of non-consenting members were dropped.

The AAP MP was suspended under Rule 256 of the Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in Council of States which allows the Chairman to suspend a member “who disregards the authority of the Chair” or “abuses the rules of the Council by persistently and willfully obstructing the business”. Chadha said, that at the highest, suspension under this rule can extend till the end of the session and not beyond.

The case also highlighted the need to determine the contours of freedom of speech within the House and the right to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution available to a member even outside the Parliament.

Although the Court was willing to go into the question, it sought a way out after advocate Farasat pointed out that the petitioner had no intention to affect the dignity of the House and was willing to offer an apology. Due to the indefinite suspension, Chadha was unable to take part in the various parliamentary committees of which he is a member.