Latest News
Article 142 – POWER TO DO COMPLETE JUSTICE under the RULE OF JUSTICE
Article 142 – POWER TO DO COMPLETE JUSTICE under the RULE OF JUSTICE
In a recent judgment the supreme court used its powers under article 142 of the Indian Constitution[1] to restrain MLA Thounaojam Shyamkumar from attending the Manipur Legislative Assembly. The exercise of this power was done in response to the crossing of the floor done by the MLA Shyamkumar. He won on a Congress Party ticket in the 2017 legislative elections, but later defected and changed his party allegiance to BJP. A disqualification petition was issued against him in the State Assembly.
The apex court took the matter in its hands when the Speaker failed to decide on the petition pending against the MLA, even after a month’s time. The verdict brought an immediate end to his tenure as a minister and restricted him to be a part of the Assembly. The court, in clear terms, stated that the Speaker cannot stay a disqualification petition indefinitely. This judicial activism was only possible due to the bestowed to the SC under Article 142.
The use of this power by the courts is justified under the concept of Rule of Justice. It is a concept, that is wider in scope than the Rule of Law. The former concept augments the latter and helps in overcoming the loopholes of Rule of Law, hence both must go hand-in-hand. Rule of law is a mechanism that is commonly used by the judiciary to do justice for people. In other words, it can be said that each person has to abide by the rules for justice prescribed by law.
But times may arise when there is no law to govern a specific case, but justice may require immediate and inevitable action. There could be legislation that doesn't fulfill society's existing demands and expectations at large. Or morality demands an action, which may not be taken. The principle of justice, equity and good faith may be applicable in a given situation where the law has left a vacuum or does not sufficiently resolve the problem at hand. [2]
Justice is the outcome of the law. But often laws are hurdles in the path to achieving justice, requiring lawyers, individuals, court officials to follow written instructions as to whether or not justice is the outcome. Benefit of doubt or lack of evidence often extends a case for years with no outcome. Thus, Rule of Justice empowers the SC to pass an order under its domains, it feels necessary ‘to do complete justice’.
Article 142 is the mirror image of the Rule of Justice in the Constitution. In another judgment, the apex court stated, “It was prudent to leave this power undefined and uncatalogued so that it remains sufficiently elastic to be shaped according to the situation."[3] This allowed SC to extend the effect of its judgment over cases not in the appeal.[4]
The article has helped SC in several landmark cases.
- In the Ayodhya judgment, the SC granted 5 acres of land for the mosque through this power.[5]
- In the Bhopal Gas Tragedy case, to provide aid to thousands of victims.[6]
- To initiate investigation IPL fixing scandals[7]
- To grant divorce in the irretrievable breakdown of marriage.[8]
and in the above judgment against the defection of MLA Shyamkumar.[9]
[1] Article 142, The Constitution of India.
[2] Praveen Dalal, Justice Through Electronic Governance, pp 213, Workshop Report On Information And Communication Technology (Ict) Tools & Usages, National Judicial Academy, http://nja.gov.in/Concluded_Programes_2015-16/P-972%20READING_MATERIAL.pdf (Last visited on 09 April, 2020).
[3] D.D.A v Skipper Construction Co (P) Ltd, AIR 1996 SC 2005.
[4] Manganese Ore (India) Ltd vs Chandi Lal Saha, 1991 AIR 520.
[5] M. Siddiq v. Suresh Das, (2020) 1 SCC 1; 2019 SCC OnLine SC 1440.
[6] Union Carbide Corporation Etc. ... vs Union Of India, 1992 AIR 248.
[7] BCCI vs Cricket Association of Bihar, (2015) 3 SCC 251.
[8] R.Srinivas Kumar vs R.Shametha, (2019) 9 SCC 409.
[9] Keisham Meghachandra Singh v. Manipur Legislative Assembly, 2020 SCC OnLine SC 55.
- Article 142
- Complete Justice
- Judicial Activism
