Giving orders to the President of India is unconstitutional, VP Dhankhar raises questions on Supreme Court’s decision

New Delhi, April 17: The Vice President of India Jagdeep Dhankhar questioned the Supreme Court’s decision allowing judicial review of the President and Governor’s approval on the state government’s bills, in which three months have been fixed for the President to consider the bills sent by the Governor.

He said that the Supreme Court has the right to interpret the Constitution but there cannot be a situation where the President can be directed and that too on what basis.

Addressing the sixth batch of Rajya Sabha interns at the Vice President’s Enclave today, Dhankhar said that the post of the President of India is very high. The President takes an oath to protect, preserve and defend the Constitution. This oath is taken only by the President and the Governors appointed by him. At the same time, the Vice President, Prime Minister, Ministers, MPs, Judges all take an oath to follow the Constitution.

He said that Article 142 has become a nuclear missile against democratic forces, which is available round the clock to the judiciary. Under Article 142 of the Constitution, the Supreme Court has the power to pass any order necessary to ensure “complete justice” in any case pending before it. Dhankhar said that he had never thought that he would have to see this day in his life. The

Vice President said in strong words that the President has been asked to take a decision in a time-bound manner. If this is not done, the bill will automatically become a law. He said, “Where are we going? What is happening in the country? We have to be extremely sensitive. It is not a question of whether someone files a review or not. We did not want democracy for this day.”

He said, “We have judges who will make laws, who will do the work of the executive, who will act as a super parliament and they will have no accountability because the law of the country does not apply to them.” The Vice President said that five or more judges decide on constitutional subjects.

He said, “The judges who made the President virtually issue an order and present a scenario that it will be the law of the land have forgotten the power of the Constitution. How can that group of judges deal with something under Article 145(3). If it was protected it would have been for five out of eight. We now need to amend that as well. Five out of eight will mean the interpretation will be by majority. Well, five means more than majority out of eight but keep that aside.”