&w=3840&q=100)
States will be at whims of governor if nod to Bills withheld: Supreme Court
'Would we not be giving total powers to the governor to sit in over an appeal. The government elected with the majority will be at (the) whims and fancies of (the) governor,' Chief Justice of India(CJI), Justice B R Gavai, said.
The court was hearing the maintainability of the reference made by President Droupadi Murmu under Article 143. The reference was concerning the April 8 ruling of the top court that set timelines for governors and the President to grant assent to bills passed by the legislature.
In the April 8 judgment, a bench of Justice J B Pardiwala and Justice R Mahadevan invoked its special powers under Article 142 of the Constitution to fix deadlines for the President and governors to act on state bills.
Replying to the query of the CJI, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre, told the Constitution Bench of CJI B R Gavai, Justice Surya Kant, Justice Vikram Nath, Justice P S Narasimha, and Justice Atul S Chandurkar that everyone derives power from the Constitution.
On the powers of the governor under Article 200, Mehta said the governor has four options- assent to the bill, withhold assent, reserve the bill for consideration of the President or send it back to the legislature. He said that when the governor withholds assent, the bill falls through.
Article 200 of the Indian Constitution outlines the governor's powers regarding assent to bills passed by the state legislature. If a bill is returned, the legislature can pass it again with or without amendments, and the governor is then bound to give assent.
The bench, however, remarked that the governor has to communicate his or her decision and that the focal point of the debate would be whether withholding is temporary or permanent. Mehta said the power to withhold is to be used rarely and only in the first instance, as it leads to the death of the bill.
'The governor is not just a postman. He represents the Union of India, appointed by the President. The President is elected by the entire nation by way of the entire election and that is also a way of democratic expression,' Mehta said.
After the April 8 judgment, the President invoked Article 143(1) of the Constitution of India to consult the Supreme Court. This Article, commonly referred to as the power of 'Presidential Reference', empowers the President of India to seek the Supreme Court's opinion on questions of law or fact of public importance.
President Murmu, on May 13, posed 14 questions to the Supreme Court of India on several aspects of law, including the ambit of the powers under Article 142.
In response, the states of Kerala and Tamil Nadu filed an application questioning the maintainability of the reference. It urged the Supreme Court to return the reference unanswered and said it was an attempt by the Centre to indirectly overrule binding judgments without disclosure.
Meanwhile, the central government supported the reference, arguing that the power of governors and the President to act on bills cannot be bound by judicial timelines. The hearing will continue on Thursday.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
10 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Sambhal temple-mosque row: Court sets August 28 to hear case
A court in Chandausi on Thursday (August 21, 2025) fixed August 28 to hear the ongoing Shahi Jama Masjid-Harihar temple dispute. The matter was listed for hearing before civil judge (senior division) Aditya Singh. Advocate of the Hindu side, Gopal Sharma, told PTI that on Thursday, the opposite side filed an application saying that since this matter was pending in the Supreme Court, the present court did not have the jurisdiction to hear this case. The matter was then deferred to August 28. The Muslim side has challenged the maintainability of the case in the Allahabad High Court, but on May 19, the High Court upheld the trial court's order permitting a court-monitored survey and directed it to proceed with the matter. While talking to reporters, Shahi Jama Masjid's advocate Qasim Jamal confirmed filing the application and a judgment related to the Worship Act. It was directed till the Supreme Court heard the case, all religious matters will not be heard by any other court, he added. "Neither any case can be heard nor any action can be taken, when the order of the Supreme Court is still pending and a stay has been imposed till the next hearing," he said. Mr. Jamal added, "If this hearing takes place then it will be a violation of the Supreme Court's guidelines." The trial court, therefore, said any objection should be filed by August 28. The dispute dates back to November 19 last year, when Hindu petitioners, including advocates Hari Shankar Jain and Vishnu Shankar Jain, filed a suit in the Sambhal district court claiming the mosque was built over a pre-existing temple. A court-ordered survey was conducted on the same day (November 19), followed by another on November 24. The second survey on November 24 led to significant unrest in Sambhal, resulting in the death of four persons and injuries to 29 police personnel. The police booked SP MP Ziaur Rahman Barq and mosque committee head Zafar Ali in relation to the violence besides registering an FIR against 2,750 unidentified persons.
Scroll.in
10 minutes ago
- Scroll.in
Muslims in UP's Moradabad told not to name wedding bands after Hindu deities
The police in Uttar Pradesh's Moradabad have ordered Muslim wedding band operators not to name their bands after Hindu deities after a complaint was filed on the chief minister's portal, the Hindustan Times reported on Thursday. A complaint was registered by a lawyer on July 9, claiming that about 15 to 20 Muslim band operators in the district were running their businesses using the names of Hindu deities, the newspaper quoted unidentified police officers as saying. The complainant claimed that the practice hurt religious sentiments. Superintendent of Police (City) Kumar Ranvijay Singh told Amar Ujala that several band operators in the district were summoned on Tuesday and told to remove such names. 'All of them have said that they will remove the names,' he was quoted as saying. The complainant told the Hindustan Times that the wedding band industry in Moradabad was largely dominated by Muslims. 'Yet many of these establishments operate under Hindu names, including those of gods and goddesses,' he said. 'This is an attempt to distort identity,' he alleged. 'The chief minister [Adityanath] himself has called for action against such practices.' The action taken by the police based on his complaint was not discrimination, but 'legal action', he told the newspaper. This came a month after the Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand governments directed eateries along the Kanwar Yatra pilgrimage route to display quick response codes with their owners' identities. The matter was challenged in the Supreme Court, where a counsel for the Uttarakhand government reportedly claimed that the real problem was dhabas named 'Shiva Dhaba' or 'Parvati Dhaba' being run by Muslims. On July 22, the court refused to examine the legality of the directives issued by the two state governments. Similar orders were issued by Uttar Pradesh in 2024. The police in the state's Muzaffarnagar had claimed at the time that the decision was taken to ' avoid confusion ' among devotees who will travel on the route.
The Wire
10 minutes ago
- The Wire
‘Manipur Violence Was Not Spontaneous, But Planned and Ethnically Targeted': PUCL Report
New Delhi: The People's Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) on August 20 released the Independent People's Tribunal on the Ongoing Ethnic Conflict in Manipur at the Press Club of India, New Delhi. The 694-page report, authored under the chairmanship of former Supreme Court judge Justice Kurian Joseph, delivers the conclusion: 'The violence which erupted on May 3, 2023, was not spontaneous but planned, ethnically targeted, and facilitated by state failures.' Wide representation The Tribunal was set up by PUCL in 2024 with a jury of eminent figures chosen deliberately from outside Manipur to ensure neutrality. Alongside Justice Kurian Joseph, the jury included Justice K. Kannan, Justice Anjana Prakash, former bureaucrats M.G. Devasahayam and Swaraj Bir Singh, academics such as Uma Chakravarti and Virginius Xaxa, human rights defenders like Manjula Pradeep and Henri Tiphagne, and journalist-author Aakar Patel. Over 150 survivors gave oral testimony, while thousands more submitted accounts in writing or through group discussions. 'The voices we heard,' the jury wrote, 'paint a picture of systemic impunity and targeted brutality.' The report records that more than 60,000 internally displaced people 'remain in camps with no end in sight, even after 27 months of violence.' Fault lines and flashpoints The report identified long-standing ethnic divisions, socio-political marginalisation, and land disputes as the soil in which the violence was sown. These were aggravated by 'systematic hate campaigns and political rhetoric' that amplified mistrust between the Meitei and Kuki-Zo communities. A major trigger was the March 27, 2023 order of the Manipur high court recommending Scheduled Tribe (ST) status for the Meiteis. The directive sparked fears among tribal groups – particularly Kukis and Nagas - that their constitutional protections would be eroded, the report said. 'The judgment acted as a catalyst,' the report noted, 'setting off state-wide protests on May 3, which quickly descended into targeted violence.' The report also dismantled two dominant narratives: that Kukis were 'illegal immigrants' from Myanmar, and that they were driving poppy cultivation. 'Both claims were found to be exaggerated and politically weaponised,' the report said, 'serving to demonise the community.' Brutality and complicity Survivor testimonies provided some of the report's most searing insights, "We saw killings, mutilations, disrobing of women, and sexual violence on a large scale". Women testified that police often failed to help them, and in some instances, 'handed them over to mobs.' Hate propaganda played a central role. 'Social media was flooded with incendiary content, while partisan print media coverage deepened divisions,' the report stated. One survivor told the jury: 'We knew the violence was coming; the government did nothing to stop it.' The collapse of relief measures worsened suffering. Camps lacked basic sanitation, food, and medical facilities. Hospitals were attacked, staff fled, and patients were denied treatment on communal lines. The report noted 'serious mental health consequences – trauma, PTSD, and depression – with no institutional interventions in place.' Collapse of constitutional mechanisms The report's findings on law and order were particularly severe – 'FIRs were selectively filed, investigations delayed, and security forces accused of active complicity.' It criticised the state government for failing to create impartial Special Investigation Teams. Even interventions by the Supreme Court were described as inadequate. 'The Gita Mittal Committee and limited CBI probes were narrow in scope, poorly resourced, and lacked follow-up,' the report observed. Both state and central governments were indicted for 'enabling impunity and worsening ethnic divides.' Recommendations for justice and peace The report further outlined a comprehensive roadmap to restore accountability and rebuild trust in Manipur. It called for a permanent bench of the high court in the hill districts to ensure equal access to justice and the creation of an independent Special Investigation Team to probe thousands of pending cases, including those involving security forces. It urged strict prosecution of hate speech and propaganda that fuelled the violence, while also advocating a restorative justice framework with reparations, acknowledgment of harm, and survivor reintegration. Strengthened relief measures and sustained community dialogue were stressed as essential to healing deep ethnic divides. 'The people of Manipur deserve more than piecemeal measures,' the report declared. 'Without a systemic response, peace cannot return.' Justice Kurian Joseph told The Wire: 'Justice and accountability are non-negotiable if democracy and peace are to return to the state.' A warning for the future Two years since Manipur was engulfed in violence, the report's findings remain bleak. Survivors have consistently testified that 'the state either allowed the violence to happen or actively enabled it.' The report ends with a stark warning: 'if accountability is not enforced and impunity allowed to persist, Manipur could become a dangerous precedent; a template for future instances of state complicity in ethnic violence.' This article went live on August twenty-first, two thousand twenty five, at fifty minutes past three in the afternoon.
