1964: It was perhaps the first stand-off between judiciary and legislature. The UP legislature had ordered the arrest of one Keshav Singh for committing contempt outside the legislature. He filed a habeas corpus plea with Allahabad High Court's Lucknow bench and got bail. The legislature ordered him rearrested and asked for the two HC judges who had granted bail to be brought in custody to the House to answer contempt charges. A full bench of 28 judges of the HC (excluding the two) issued an interim order staying the assembly order. The Speaker still issued arrest warrants against the two judges while a petition sought to initiate contempt of court proceedings against the Speaker and MLAs. Supreme Court ruled in 1965 that legislative privileges were subject to judicial review.
1973: In the Kesavananda Bharati case, Supreme Court held that the power of the legislature to amend the Constitution has limits. The legislature, it held, could not amend the "basic structure" of the Statute. While there were differences in the bench on what "basic structure" meant, the majority held that supremacy of Constitution; republic & democratic form of govt; secularism, separation of powers & federal character formed the basic structure.
1975: The Allahabad High Court upheld an election petition filed by Raj Narain alleging that Indira Gandhi had indulged in electoral malpractices like using the government machinery for her campaign in the 1971 Lok Sabha polls. The HC struck down her election and barred her from contesting elections for six years, which would effectively have meant she would have to quit as PM. The situation ultimately resulted in the imposition of the Emergency.
1979: A case involving Maneka Gandhi's passport being seized led to SC introducing the concept of "due process" in our jurisprudence. The court held the mere fact that laid down procedures were followed before depriving Maneka of her passport did not amount to due process having been followed. It said due process — meaning that the law is "right, just and fair" — must be shown where fundamental rights are curtailed.
1992: In the case of Indira Sawhney and Others versus the Union of India, the SC upheld the proposed reservations for OBCs, but subjected them to important caveats. These were the stipulation that the "creamy layer" of OBCs must be excluded from reservations and that reservations must not exceed 50% of the total available jobs. With 22% already reserved for the SCs and STs, this meant OBCs could get a quota of only 27%.
1993: In what is known as the "second judges case", a nine-judge SC bench ruled that in appointment of judges to the SC and high courts, executive cannot go against the opinion of the CJI. It spelt out what consultative process the CJI must go through in forming his or her opinion. This overturned a 1981 judgement in the "first judges cases" which had given primacy to the executive in appointments to higher judiciary.
1994: In what is generally referred to as the Bommai judgement, a nine-judge SC bench held that the proclamation of President's Rule in a state under Article 356 was not immune to judicial review. It also held that such a proclamation would have to be ratified by both houses of Parliament. The ruling had the effect of drastically curbing the earlier wanton use of Article 356 by parties at the Centre against state governments run by their rivals.
1997: As part of its judgement in the Jain hawala case, SC said Central Vigilance Commission should be made a statutory body & CVC should be appointed by a three-member panel consisting of the PM, home minister and leader of opposition. It tried to insulate the CBI and the Enforcement Directorate from political control by saying that the heads of the two bodies should be appointed by a panel headed by the CVC.
2002: A three-judge SC bench made it mandatory for election candidates to declare assets, criminal cases filed against them & educational background. The poll panel followed with a notification to the same effect a month later. The govt tried to counter this through an amendment to the Representation of the People Act based on an all-party consensus. In 2003, another bench struck down the amendment as unconstitutional.
1973: In the Kesavananda Bharati case, Supreme Court held that the power of the legislature to amend the Constitution has limits. The legislature, it held, could not amend the "basic structure" of the Statute. While there were differences in the bench on what "basic structure" meant, the majority held that supremacy of Constitution; republic & democratic form of govt; secularism, separation of powers & federal character formed the basic structure.
1975: The Allahabad High Court upheld an election petition filed by Raj Narain alleging that Indira Gandhi had indulged in electoral malpractices like using the government machinery for her campaign in the 1971 Lok Sabha polls. The HC struck down her election and barred her from contesting elections for six years, which would effectively have meant she would have to quit as PM. The situation ultimately resulted in the imposition of the Emergency.
1979: A case involving Maneka Gandhi's passport being seized led to SC introducing the concept of "due process" in our jurisprudence. The court held the mere fact that laid down procedures were followed before depriving Maneka of her passport did not amount to due process having been followed. It said due process — meaning that the law is "right, just and fair" — must be shown where fundamental rights are curtailed.
1992: In the case of Indira Sawhney and Others versus the Union of India, the SC upheld the proposed reservations for OBCs, but subjected them to important caveats. These were the stipulation that the "creamy layer" of OBCs must be excluded from reservations and that reservations must not exceed 50% of the total available jobs. With 22% already reserved for the SCs and STs, this meant OBCs could get a quota of only 27%.
1993: In what is known as the "second judges case", a nine-judge SC bench ruled that in appointment of judges to the SC and high courts, executive cannot go against the opinion of the CJI. It spelt out what consultative process the CJI must go through in forming his or her opinion. This overturned a 1981 judgement in the "first judges cases" which had given primacy to the executive in appointments to higher judiciary.
1994: In what is generally referred to as the Bommai judgement, a nine-judge SC bench held that the proclamation of President's Rule in a state under Article 356 was not immune to judicial review. It also held that such a proclamation would have to be ratified by both houses of Parliament. The ruling had the effect of drastically curbing the earlier wanton use of Article 356 by parties at the Centre against state governments run by their rivals.
1997: As part of its judgement in the Jain hawala case, SC said Central Vigilance Commission should be made a statutory body & CVC should be appointed by a three-member panel consisting of the PM, home minister and leader of opposition. It tried to insulate the CBI and the Enforcement Directorate from political control by saying that the heads of the two bodies should be appointed by a panel headed by the CVC.
2002: A three-judge SC bench made it mandatory for election candidates to declare assets, criminal cases filed against them & educational background. The poll panel followed with a notification to the same effect a month later. The govt tried to counter this through an amendment to the Representation of the People Act based on an all-party consensus. In 2003, another bench struck down the amendment as unconstitutional.
No comments:
Post a Comment