'Article 142 Has Become Nuclear Missile' : Vice President Objects To Supreme Court's Direction Against President

Vice President of India Jagdeep Dhankhar took serious objection to the recent Supreme Court judgment, which laid down timelines for the President to decide on the Bills referred by the Governor. He went to the extent of saying that Article 142 of the Constitution has become a "nuclear missile" available with judges against democratic forces.

"There is a directive to the President by a recent judgment. Where are we heading? What is happening in the country?," VP Dhankhar said.

"We never bargained for democracy for this day. President being called upon to decide in a time-bound manner, and if not, becomes law. So we have judges who will legislate, who will perform executive functions, who will act as super-parliament, and absolutely have no accountability because law of the land does not apply to them," he said.

Addressing the 6th batch of Rajya Sabha interns, the Vice President said that as per Article 145(3), a substantial Constitutional issue has to be decided by a bench having at least 5 judges. However, the decision against the President was given by a two-judge bench. When the mandate of five 5-judges was prescribed, the strength of the Supreme Court was eight. Since the strength of the Supreme Court has now increased to 31, there is a need to amend Article 145(3) to raise the number of minimum judges in a Constitution Bench, the President opined.

"We cannot have a situation where you direct the President of India and on what basis? The only right you have under the Constitution is to interpret the Constitution under Article 145(3). There, it has to be five judges or more... Article 142, Article 142 has become a nuclear missile against Democratic forces, available to judiciary 24 x 7", he added.

The Vice President was referring to the recent judgment passed by the Supreme Court in the case against the Tamil Nadu Governor over the delay in granting assent to Bills passed by the State Assembly. Apart from laying down timelines for the Governor, the judgment also set timelines for the President's decisions on referred Bills as per Article 201 of the Constitution. If the President fails to decide within the prescribed timeframe, the States can approach the Courts seeking a writ of mandamus against the President, the Court held. 

The Court also held that if a Bill is referred by the Governor on the ground of unconstitutionality, then the President ought to seek the Supreme Court's opinion as per Article 143 before taking a decision, the Court held.

The Vice President also referred to the recent controversy regarding the discovery of cash at the residence of Justice Yashwant Varma.

"An event happened on the night of 14th and 15th of March in New Delhi, at the residence of a judge. For seven days, no one knew about it. We have to ask questions to ourselves. Is the delay explainable? Condonable? Does it not raise certain fundamental questions? In any ordinary situation, and ordinary situations define rule of law - things would have been different. It was only on 21st March, disclosed by a newspaper, that people of the country were shocked as never before."

"Thereafter, fortunately, in public domain, we had input from authoritative source, the Supreme Court of India. And the input indicated culpability. Input did not lead to doubt that something was amiss. Something required to be investigated. Now the nation waits with bated breath. The nation is restive because one of our institutions, to which people have looked up always with highest respect and deference, was put in the dock," he said.

He flagged that no FIR was registered over the incident and that the inquiry being conducted by a judges' panel has not disclosed its findings. How can investigation be the job of the judiciary, he asked. He also pointed out that many judges have not declared their assets.