India

President Murmu Flags Judicial Overreach; Asks Can Timelines Be Imposed On Assent Of Bills

A month after the Supreme Court set timelines for the President and Governors to act on state Bills, President Droupadi Murmu has approached the top court for clarity. President Murmu invoked Article 143 of the Constitution, seeking its opinion on whether courts can impose deadlines on Governors for clearing Bills.

Under Article 143, the President may consult the Supreme Court on legal or public importance matters. Murmu questioned whether a Governor must act on the advice of the Council of Ministers under Article 200. She also asked if a Governor’s discretion is justiciable, citing Article 361, which grants immunity to the President and Governors from court proceedings over their official actions.

The President further asked whether, in the absence of a specific timeline, the court can prescribe deadlines or a manner of exercising discretion under Article 201 of the Constitution.

In April, Justices JB Pardiwala and R Mahadevan resolved a standoff between Tamil Nadu’s DMK government and Governor RN Ravi. The bench called the Governor’s refusal to clear 10 Bills “illegal and arbitrary” and gave a three-month deadline for action on re-passed Bills.

The ruling stated that the President should consult the court on constitutional matters. It noted that while courts avoid political issues, they may intervene when a Bill threatens democratic principles or raises constitutional doubts.

Court Asserts Executive Cannot Judge Bill’s Validity

The court clarified that only constitutional courts can assess a Bill’s legality. The Union executive should not judge a Bill’s constitutionality and should refer legal doubts to the court under Article 143.

The court acknowledged its advisory opinions are non-binding. However, it said these opinions carry weight unless outweighed by policy grounds. If the President withholds assent against court advice, the decision must be backed by strong reasons.

The Supreme Court will now decide whether to form a Constitution bench or stand by the earlier two-judge ruling. This development comes as Chief Justice BR Gavai assumes office.

Also Read: Trump Says India Is Offering Us A Zero Tariff Trade Deal

Ajaypal Choudhary

Recent Posts

JP Nadda Slams Rahul Gandhi’s ‘Match-Fixing’ Claims As ‘Desperation Of Losing’ Polls

Rahul Gandhi's opinion piece appeared in a national daily and sparked political uproar. Opposition parties…

11 mins ago

Poverty In India Reduced Via Tangible Boost In Household Living Standards, Incomes

In 2022–23, poverty under the revised $3.00 line stood at just 5.25 per cent in…

30 mins ago

Chhattisgarh: Seven Maoists Killed In Indravati National Park Operation

Five Maoists were killed in two separate encounters with security forces in Chhattisgarh’s Bijapur district,…

1 hour ago

Carney Invites Modi To G7 Summit, Highlights India’s Global Supply Chain Role

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney said the most populous country, with the fifth-largest economy, must…

1 hour ago

RBI Frontloads Rate Cuts To Boost Growth Amid Low Inflation: Crisil

The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) has frontloaded its rate cuts to support economic growth,…

2 hours ago

PM Modi Urges Global Action On Coastal Resilience At Nice Summit

PM Narendra Modi on Saturday called for urgent global action to build infrastructure that can…

2 hours ago