Constitution provides for proclamation of emergency the suspension of the remedy under Article 359 for enforcement of fundamental rights enabling even detention of memebrs of Parliament when necessary. Article 85 is not suspended. The six months rule is obligatory. It follows that the members' right under Art. 105 are not available under a detention in these circumstances. For the purposes of Article 105 (3) a conviction under Penal laws or detention under Emergency laws must be deemed to be valid till it is set aside. 76. When under Article 359 the President during the operation of a Proclamation of Emergency by order declared that the right to move any court for the enforcemnt of rights conferred by Part III shall remain suspended and persons who are members of House of Parliament are in detention under orders made under the Maintenance of Internal Security Act the detention cannot be challenged by collateral attack on the ground of deprivation of their participation in the Parliamentary proceedings. The challenge will be questioning the detention on the ground that the detention is in violation of Articles 19 21 and 22. 77. Article 85 provides that not more than six months shall intervene between the two Sessions of Parliament Article 85 is not a provision regarding the constitution of Parliament but of holding of Sessions. The powers, privileges and immunities of Parliament and its members as provided in Article 105 are that they shall be such as may be defined by Parliament by law and until so define shall be those of the House of Common of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. 78. In Special Reference No. 1 1964 (1965) 1 SCR 413 = (AIR 1965 S 745) it was held that the court could entertain a petition under Article 226 on the ground that the imposition of penalty by the legislature on a person who is not a member of the legislature or issuing process against such person for its contempt committed outside the four walls of the House. 79. The scope of the parliamentary privilege of freedom from arrest has been defined positively and negatively. The positive aspect of the privilege is expressed in the claim of the Commons to freedom from arrest in all civil actions or suits during the time of Parliament and during the period when a member was journeying or returning from Parliament. The privilege has been defined negatively in the claim of the Commons which specifically excepted treason, felony and breach of surety of the peace. 80. The privilege of freedom from arrest is limited to civil causes, and has not been allowed to interfere with the administration of criminal justice of emergency legislation (See May's Parliamentary Practice 18th Ed. at p. 100) In early times the distinction between "civil" and "criminal" was not clearly expressed. The development of the privilege has shown a tendency to confine it more narrowly to cases of a civil character and to exclude not only every kind of criminal case but also cases which while not strictly criminal partake more of a criminal than of a civil character. This development is in conformity with the principle laid down by the Commons in a conference with the Lords in 1641; "Privilege of Parliament is granted in regard of service of the Commonwealth and is not to be used to the danger of the Common-wealth". 81. In Wilkes' case 19 State Tr.,981 it was resolved by both Houses on 29th November, 1763 that the privilege of Parliament does not extend to the case of writing and publishing seditious libels nor ought to be allowed to obstruct the