Judicial Powers Are Constitutionally Bound
- Source of Power: All judicial powers are vested in the Constitution, not outside it.
- Judges must operate within the constitutional framework; exceeding it amounts to “proved misbehaviour” (Ground for removal under Article 124(4) for Supreme Court judges).
- This ensures accountability to the Constitution, not personal discretion.
Relevance : GS 2(Judiciary,Parliament ,Separation of Powers)
Separation of Powers as a Check
- As reaffirmed in L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India (1997):
- Judicial independence is secured by the separation of powers.
- However, if judges breach this boundary, it becomes a constitutional violation (especially of Article 50 – separation of judiciary from executive).
Impeachment Mechanism for Accountability
- Article 124(4): A judge can be removed for “proved misbehaviour or incapacity”.
- The procedure involves a parliamentary process, thereby making judges answerable to democratic oversight, though through a rigorous standard to protect judicial independence.
Judiciary’s Power to Uphold Popular Sovereignty
- The President and Governors, as heads of the executive, must act within the bounds of popular sovereignty (i.e., reflect the will of the legislature).
- The judiciary directing them to act within a timeframe for assent is to protect democratic principles, not to override them.
Rule of Law and the Judiciary
- The rule of law is central to India’s constitutional democracy.
- The Vice-President’s claim that “the law does not apply to judges” undermines this principle.
- Judges are not above the law — they are subject to constitutional scrutiny and removal mechanisms.
Judicial Review as a Duty, Not Overreach
- Judiciary is empowered to review executive and legislative actions (Articles 32, 226).
- Article 142: Supreme Court has the power to do complete justice — a unique provision that helps it fill gaps when no specific law exists.
- This does not make it a ‘super parliament’, but a guardian of the Constitution.
Parliamentary Power to Override Judgments
- If needed, Parliament can make new laws to override judicial decisions (unless they violate fundamental rights or the basic structure).
- This balances judicial interpretation with legislative supremacy, reaffirming popular sovereignty.
Conclusion
- The judiciary is accountable to the Constitution, subject to removal for violations, and acts within its assigned role of constitutional interpretation.
- Calling it a “super parliament” or implying immunity from law misrepresents constitutional checks and balances.
