The separation of powers mandated by the Constitution has saved the day for the country on several occasions. The executive’s constant urge to meddle with the judiciary has been effectively thwarted so far, though the Collegium has been severely handicapped in its functioning, as the Justice KM Joseph promotion issue showed.
Therefore, every opportunity that the executive gets, in which it feels that the judiciary may be interfering with the activities of the legislature, it fights back with quick replies, citing constitutional prerogatives.
Such a situation arose at the Supreme Court on Tuesday (August 21) when the constitution bench of CJI Dipak Misra and Justices Rohinton Fali Nariman, AM Khanwilkar, DY Chandrachud and Indu Malhotra was hearing a plea on political candidates with criminal cases pending.
Arguing for the state, Attorney General KK Venugopal made a strong comment on the issue, saying that the judiciary will be stepping into areas the constitution has mandated for the legislature. The AG asked is five judges sitting on the bench were capable of passing a law. The bench agreed that it was not in position to do so and that it was certainly not interfering with the activities of the legislature.
However, it was agreed that this was an area where all laws silent on. Hence it was probably possible for the judiciary to issue guidelines, at least to the Election Commission. This view was espoused by the petitioners, who were represented in court by the AG’s son, Krishnan Venugopal. The father-son duo were at ideological loggerheads in court, straining to decide how am area devoid of legal coverage can be dealt with by the court, or, if it at all can. The AG virtually warned the court against treading into the legislature’s territory.
– India Legal Bureau