Dhankhar’s strong words to the judiciary came days after the Supreme Court fixed a timeline for the President to grant assent to the bills reserved for her consideration by the governor. He also described Article 142 as a “nuclear missile against democratic forces available to the judiciary 24×7”.
In a sharp critique of the judiciary, Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar on Thursday expressed strong reservations about the Supreme Court setting a timeline for the President of India to act on bills sent for assent. Addressing Rajya Sabha interns, Dhankhar questioned the judiciary’s role in what he termed as “overstepping constitutional boundaries.” Dhankhar said, “The Supreme Court cannot act as a super Parliament or fire a nuclear missile at democratic institutions…So, we have judges who will legislate, who will perform executive functions, who will act as super Parliament and absolutely have no accountability because the law of the land does not apply to them.” His remarks come in the wake of the apex court indicating that it may establish a timeline within which the President must act on bills forwarded by governors for consideration.
The vice president also described Article 142, which grants plenary powers to the Supreme Court, as a “nuclear missile against democratic forces available to the judiciary 24×7”. “Article 142 has become a nuclear missile against democratic forces and available to the judiciary 24×7,” he added. During his address, Dhankhar also proposed an amendment to Article 145(3), which deals with the composition of the bench required to decide substantial questions of constitutional law.
What does Article 142 say?
It is to be noted here that Article 142 of the Indian Constitution grants the Supreme Court powers to ensure “complete justice” in any case pending before it. This provision serves as a constitutional tool that allows the apex court to bridge gaps in existing laws, go beyond statutory provisions, and provide remedies that might not strictly conform to written legislation, as long as they serve justice within the bounds of the Constitution.
Interestingly, the draft version of this article—then Article 118—was adopted by the Constituent Assembly without any debate, leaving its interpretation and boundaries largely to the Supreme Court’s own discretion over time.
Over the years, the top court has invoked Article 142 in landmark cases, such as quashing criminal proceedings, granting divorce on grounds of irretrievable breakdown of marriage, and even approving settlements in complex cases like the Bhopal gas tragedy. The article has enabled the court to issue directives to government bodies, suggest policy changes, and enforce guidelines in the interest of public welfare.
However, while these powers are far-reaching, they are not absolute. The Supreme Court cannot use Article 142 to override core constitutional provisions, violate the substantive rights of individuals not party to a case, or breach the principles of natural justice. In essence, Article 142 allows the Court to assume quasi-legislative and quasi-executive roles in specific contexts, especially in safeguarding fundamental rights, upholding constitutional values, and addressing public interest concerns where the law may fall short.
Dhankhar stresses separation of powers
The Vice President said his worries were at a “very highest level” and he had never thought that he would have the occasion to see it. He reminded the audience that the President of India is in a very elevated position. Stressing the principle of separation of powers, he underlined that when the government is elected by the people, the government is accountable to Parliament and to the people in the elections. “There is a principle of accountability in operation. In Parliament, you can ask questions. But if this executive governance is by the judiciary, how do you ask questions? Whom do you hold accountable in elections? Time has come when our three institutions — legislature, judiciary and executive — must blossom,” he added.
