Concerns Over Article 142 of Indian Constitution

Recent discussions have emerged regarding the judiciary’s use of Article 142 of the Constitution of India. Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar has raised alarms about the increasing reliance on this article. He referred to it as a “nuclear missile against democratic forces.” The Vice President’s comments were made during the Valedictory Function of the Rajya Sabha Internship Programme. This context marks the ongoing debate about the balance of power among India’s branches of government.

What is Article 142?

Article 142 grants the Supreme Court of India the authority to pass any order necessary for complete justice in a case. This article allows the court to override existing laws and fill legal gaps. It can issue directions, enforce decrees, compel document production, and even punish for contempt. While it is a powerful tool for justice, it has faced criticism for potential judicial overreach.

Vice President Dhankhar’s Concerns

Dhankhar’s remarks question the judiciary’s authority to direct the President of India. He emphasised that the judiciary’s role should be limited to constitutional interpretation under Article 145(3). He proposed amending Article 145(3) to ensure that substantial constitutional matters are decided by larger benches. Dhankhar believes that current practices weaken the original intent of the Supreme Court’s structure.

Judicial Overreach and Democracy

The Vice President’s concerns reflect a broader issue of judicial overreach. Critics argue that excessive reliance on Article 142 can undermine democratic principles. They worry that the judiciary may assume powers beyond its constitutional mandate. This situation raises questions about the separation of powers and the role of each branch of government.

The Tamil Nadu Case

Dhankhar’s comments were partly in response to a recent Supreme Court ruling involving the Tamil Nadu government and Governor RN Ravi. The court ruled that once a bill is re-passed by the assembly, the governor must assent to it. The ruling invoked Article 142 to ensure complete justice by considering all ten bills cleared from the date they were re-presented. This case exemplifies the judiciary’s active role in legislative matters.

Calls for Review and Reform

In light of these developments, there are calls for a comprehensive review of constitutional interpretation practices. The Vice President advocates for a re-examination of how Article 142 is applied. He argues for reforms to prevent potential misuse of judicial powers. The ongoing debate continues to shape the discourse on the balance of power in India.

Questions for UPSC:

1. Examine the implications of judicial overreach on the balance of power in a democratic system.
2. Critically discuss the significance of Article 145(3) in the context of constitutional interpretation.
3. Analyse the relationship between the judiciary and the executive in the framework of Indian democracy.
4. Estimate the impact of recent Supreme Court rulings on state governance and legislative processes.

Answer Hints:

1. Examine the implications of judicial overreach on the balance of power in a democratic system.

1. Judicial overreach can disrupt the separation of powers, leading to encroachment on legislative and executive domains.
2. It may undermine public trust in democratic institutions if the judiciary appears to exceed its constitutional mandate.
3. Judicial decisions can shape policy outcomes, diminishing the role of elected representatives in governance.
4. Overreach can provoke political backlash, resulting in calls for judicial reforms or constitutional amendments.
5. Maintaining a balance is crucial for democracy, ensuring that each branch of government operates within its limits.

2. Critically discuss the significance of Article 145(3) in the context of constitutional interpretation.

1. Article 145(3) governs the composition of benches for substantial constitutional matters, ensuring diverse judicial perspectives.
2. Larger benches are intended to uphold the integrity of constitutional interpretation and prevent arbitrary decisions.
3. Amendments to this article could influence the quality and consistency of judicial rulings on critical issues.
4. It plays a vital role in maintaining the authority of the Supreme Court as the ultimate interpreter of the Constitution.
5. Strengthening this article may enhance public confidence in judicial processes and decisions.

3. Analyse the relationship between the judiciary and the executive in the framework of Indian democracy.

1. The judiciary interprets laws and ensures justice, while the executive implements laws and policies in governance.
2. Judicial review allows the judiciary to check executive actions, promoting accountability and rule of law.
3. Conflicts can arise when judicial decisions challenge executive authority, leading to tensions in governance.
4. The relationship is defined by mutual respect for constitutional boundaries and the principle of checks and balances.
5. Effective collaboration can enhance democratic governance, ensuring that both branches serve the public interest.

4. Estimate the impact of recent Supreme Court rulings on state governance and legislative processes.

1. Recent rulings can redefine the powers of state governors, influencing how bills are processed and approved.
2. They may empower state legislatures by limiting the governor’s discretion in bill assent, enhancing democratic representation.
3. Such rulings can set precedents that affect future interactions between state governments and the judiciary.
4. The judiciary’s involvement in legislative matters can prompt discussions on the limits of judicial authority.
5. The impact on governance can lead to adaptations in legislative strategies and executive actions at the state level.