The privileges committee of the Rajya Sabha has pulled up a news channel for referring to expunged portions of the proceedings of the House in a programme.

The panel has recommended to the information and broadcasting ministry that guidelines be issued to TV channels to ensure that they desist from airing remarks made in the House that have been deleted from the records by the presiding officer.

The committee held the editor-in-chief of Sudarshan News TV, Suresh Chavhanke, “guilty of committing gross breach of privilege and contempt of the House” for using abusive words against then member Naresh Agarwal in July 2017 in a programme in which callers also issued physical threats to the MP.

The subject of discussion in the programme was an expunged remark Agarwal had made during a discussion on mob lynching and atrocities on minorities and Dalits. Agarwal, who was then with the Samajwadi Party before moving to the BJP, had expressed regrets for his remarks in the House that day itself.

Rule 261 of the Rajya Sabha rule book provides for the expunction of words from proceedings by the chairman. Once a portion has been expunged from the records, the rule is that it should not be repeated in any media format or referred to elsewhere.

While holding the channel and its editor-in-chief guilty of breach of privilege, the committee has refrained from invoking penal jurisdiction on the ground that it would only help him get more publicity.

“The committee is of the considered view that his sole intention was to take undue advantage of the situation and hog the limelight by criticising Parliament and the member and get publicity in the process.

“Further, the committee feels that invoking penal jurisdiction would only help the contemner as he would achieve the purpose for which these expunged unparliamentary remarks were referred to in his TV programme. The committee is thus of the opinion that giving importance to such irresponsible elements will only lower the stature and dignity of Parliament as an institution and hence recommends that the matter be not pursued further and treated as closed.”

On Sadhvi Prachi’s remarks on TV in August 2015 that there are one or two terrorists in Parliament, the privileges committee has decided to let the matter rest after she tendered a written apology.

She had explained her comments as a reaction to seeing some MPs question the hanging of Yakub Memon.

She contended that if the MPs have freedom of expression, she, too, was guaranteed the same by the Constitution.

During the deliberations, K. C. Tyagi of the Janata Dal United, who was one of the signatories to the three privilege notices admitted against her, placed it on record that raising a voice against the hanging did not mean the nay-sayers were advocating the release of Memon if he was not hanged.

Although the members were not entirely satisfied with her explanation, particularly since she refused to apologise when she appeared before the committee twice, the panel “feels it better to consult its own dignity and recommends that the matter may be allowed to rest”.