Article 142 of the Indian Constitution empowers the Supreme Court to deliver “complete justice” in any pending matter, making it one of the judiciary’s most extraordinary and debated powers.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: Recently, Article 142 of the Indian Constitution was thrust back into public discourse after Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar described it as a
“nuclear missile against democratic forces” —
a sharp critique following a Supreme Court verdict that set a binding timeline for governors to act on state legislations. The Court had ruled that
“governors must decide on Bills passed by State Assemblies within three months, including those referred to the President”
This constitutional provision — which grants the Supreme Court the power to pass any decree or order necessary to ensure “complete justice” in any matter before it — has been a powerful yet controversial judicial tool. Though used sparingly in the early years, Article 142 has since evolved into a vital mechanism through which the Supreme Court has responded to exceptional legal and constitutional challenges.
Origin of Article 142: A Colonial Legacy with a Modern Twist
The roots of Article 142 can be traced to Section 210 of the Government of India Act, 1935, enacted during British colonial rule. This provision was intended to give courts the ability to pronounce final judgments or to remit matters for further inquiry, thereby vesting in them a form of inherent jurisdiction.
When the Indian Constitution was being drafted, the Constituent Assembly incorporated this principle but expanded its scope significantly by adding the phrase
“complete justice.”
Interestingly, Article 142 was passed without any significant debate or amendment, and it officially came into force in 1950.
This provision serves as a judicial safety valve, enabling the apex court to address situations where strict application of statutory laws might fall short of delivering justice.
Changing Trends: From Restraint to Regular Use
In its initial decades, the Supreme Court invoked Article 142 very cautiously. One of the earliest references came in 1958, when the Court upheld the right of legislative assemblies to regulate the publication of their debates, even overriding the fundamental right to free speech.
However, the political and legal turbulence of the 1990s marked a turning point. The use of Article 142 witnessed a sharp increase, coinciding with greater judicial activism. According to a 2024 study by IIM Ahmedabad, between 1950 and 2023, a total of 1,579 cases referred to Article 142 or the concept of “complete justice.” However, the Court explicitly exercised this power in only 50% of those cases, rejected its use in 11%, and remained ambiguous in 39%.
In 2018 and 2019, Article 142 was invoked a record 86 times each year—the highest ever until 2023. Since 2002, the Article has been cited in at least 20 cases annually.
Landmark Cases Where Article 142 Was Invoked
The power under Article 142 has been used in several high-profile and socially significant rulings. Some key examples include:
1. Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973)
The Court invoked Article 142 to reinforce the Basic Structure Doctrine, ruling that Parliament could not amend certain fundamental aspects of the Constitution, such as fundamental rights.
2. Bhopal Gas Tragedy Case (1991)
Following the catastrophic gas leak in 1984, the Supreme Court ordered Union Carbide to pay $470 million in compensation to victims. The order, passed under Article 142, underscored the Court’s ability to deliver practical justice where legislative frameworks were inadequate.
3. Arrest of Judicial Officers (1991)
When a Chief Judicial Magistrate was assaulted by police in Gujarat, the Court not only quashed the criminal proceedings but also laid down guidelines for arresting judicial officers, invoking Article 142.
4. Visakha Guidelines (1997)
In the absence of a law on sexual harassment at workplaces, the Court formulated guidelines under Article 142. These laid the groundwork for the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013.
5. Coal Allocation Scam (2012)
Amid allegations of corruption in allocating coal blocks, the Court used Article 142 to cancel nearly 200 allocations, citing public interest.
6. Alcohol Ban on Highways (2016)
To address the menace of drunk driving, the Supreme Court banned the sale of alcohol within 500 metres of national and state highways using Article 142.
7. Criminal Background of Election Candidates (2020)
The Court directed all political parties to disclose details of criminal cases against their candidates and explain why candidates with clean records were not chosen instead.
8. Ayodhya Verdict (2019)
In the landmark Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid land dispute, Article 142 was invoked to:
- Allocate land to the Sunni Waqf Board for the construction of a mosque.
- Ensure Nirmohi Akhara was included in the trust to build the Ram Temple.
9. Rajiv Gandhi Assassination Convict Release (2022)
The Court ordered the release of A.G. Perarivalan, convicted in the 1991 assassination, as his mercy plea had been pending for over a decade. Article 142 was used to deliver overdue justice.
10. Chandigarh Mayor Poll (2024)
In a significant case of electoral malpractice, the Supreme Court invoked Article 142 to set aside the manipulated mayoral poll result in Chandigarh and declared Kuldeep Kumar as the rightful winner.
Recent Controversy and Criticism
In its April 8, 2024 judgment, the Court ruled against Tamil Nadu Governor R.N. Ravi for indefinitely withholding assent on 10 Bills passed by the state assembly. The Court declared such withholding as “illegal and unconstitutional,” emphasizing that undue delays in gubernatorial decisions violate democratic principles.
This judgment prompted Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar to strongly criticize Article 142, labeling it a
“nuclear missile available to the judiciary 24×7,”
suggesting that it undermines the balance of power between the judiciary and other constitutional institutions.
A Double-Edged Sword
Article 142 remains one of the most potent and unique provisions in the Indian Constitution. While it has often been used to resolve deadlocks and deliver meaningful justice in the absence of clear laws, its sweeping scope also raises concerns about judicial overreach and separation of powers.
Nevertheless, in an evolving democracy like India, where law and policy often lag behind social realities, Article 142 continues to serve as a crucial constitutional tool for corrective justice — albeit one that must be wielded with great care and judicial restraint.
READ MORE REPORTS ON GOVERNOR BILLS
FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE