Within the wake of the Supreme Courtroom ruling that units a three-month timeline for the President to resolve on Payments referred by Governors of states, Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar mentioned Thursday that India can’t have a state of affairs the place the judiciary directs the President.
“So, now we have judges who will legislate, who will carry out govt features, who will act as tremendous Parliament, and completely haven’t any accountability as a result of the regulation of the land doesn’t apply to them,” Dhankhar mentioned whereas addressing the sixth batch of Rajya Sabha interns on the Vice President’s Enclave.
The Supreme Courtroom earlier this month declared as unlawful and inaccurate the motion of Tamil Nadu Governor R N Ravi in reserving 10 Payments for consideration of the President in November 2023 after they’d already been reconsidered by the state Meeting. Within the judgement, the apex court docket, for the primary time, prescribed that the President ought to resolve on the Payments reserved for consideration by the Governor inside three months from the date on which such reference is acquired. It mentioned that “in case of any delay past this era, applicable causes must be recorded and conveyed” to the state involved.
Referring to the Supreme Courtroom ruling, Dhankhar mentioned his worries are on the “very highest stage” and requested, “There’s a directive to the President by a current judgement. The place are we heading? What is going on within the nation?”
VIDEO | Vice-President of India Jagdeep Dhankhar (@VPIndia) says, “We can’t have a state of affairs the place you direct the President of India and on what foundation? The one proper you might have beneath the Structure is to interpret the Structure beneath Article 145(3). There it must be 5… pic.twitter.com/b6mA4XPfC0
— Press Belief of India (@PTI_News) April 17, 2025
“I by no means thought in my life I’ll have the event to see it. The President of India is a really elevated place. The President takes oath to protect, defend and defend the Structure. This oath is taken solely by the President and her appointees, the Governors…” he mentioned.
“We now have to be extraordinarily delicate. It isn’t a query of somebody submitting a evaluate or not. We by no means bargained for democracy for this present day. The President being referred to as upon to resolve in a time-bound method, and if not, it turns into regulation,” mentioned Dhankhar.
“We can’t have a state of affairs the place you direct the President of India, and on what foundation?” he requested.
Dhankhar additionally mentioned Article 142 of the Structure, which grants the Supreme Courtroom the facility to cross any order essential to make sure “full justice” in any case pending earlier than it, “has turn out to be a nuclear missile in opposition to democratic forces, accessible to the judiciary 24×7”.
Story continues under this advert
On the matter of partly burnt sacks of money being recovered from the residence of Justice Yashwant Varma final month, Dhankhar mentioned, “… In a democratic nation, purity of its legal justice system defines its path. Investigation is required… No investigation beneath regulation is in progress in the intervening time. As a result of for a legal investigation, the initiation must be by an FIR, First Info Report. It isn’t there.”
He requested whereas the Structure accords immunity from prosecution solely to the President and Governors, how a class past regulation secured this immunity, referring to the Justice Varma incident.
“The sick results of this are being felt within the thoughts of every one. Each Indian, younger and previous, is deeply involved. If the occasion had taken place at his home, the pace would have been an digital rocket. Now, it isn’t even a cattle cart,” he mentioned.
“There’s a committee of three judges investigating the matter, however investigation is the area of the chief; investigation isn’t the area of the judiciary. Is the committee beneath the Structure of India? No. Is that this committee of three judges having any sanction beneath any regulation emanating from Parliament? No. And what can the committee do? Committee can on the most make a advice. Suggestion to whom? And for what?” he requested.
Story continues under this advert
Referring to the independence of the judiciary, Dhankhar mentioned, “This independence isn’t a safety, this independence isn’t some sort of impregnable cowl in opposition to inquiry, investigation, probe. Establishments thrive with transparency, with there being probe. The surest technique to degenerate an establishment or a person is to present whole assure there will likely be no inquiry, no scrutiny, no probe.”