Author: Saumya Singh, University of Lucknow
To the point
Article 142 of Indian constitution grants Hon’ble Supreme court of India “the power to pass any decree or order for doing Complete justice ” in any case before it , where the existing laws are not adequate .While the power under article 142 is extraordinary in nature, the apex court has defined its scope and extent through its judgements over time. Article 142 has been used by Hon’ble Supreme court in various stances such as to quash criminal proceedings, dissolve marriage on grounds of irretrievable breakdown ,in cases like Bhopal gas tragedy, Vishaka guidelines and recently Supreme court granted Atul Kumar, admission to the Indian institute of technology in Dhanabad ,and Hon’ble Supreme court’s 8 April judgement in case of State of Tamil Nadu vs governor of Tamil Nadu was also based on the principle of complete justice.
Power exercised by Supreme court under article 142 is expansive, but not unlimited .The Hon’ble Supreme court can’t contravene constitutional provisions, substantive rights of non litigants or principle of natural justice.
Abstract
If one carefully observes recent legal trends, it is clearly visible that power granted under article 142 is increasingly used by Apex court .The debate on article 142 is reignited when vice president Jagdeep Dhankhar has raised objection on Hon’ble Supreme court’s order that sets timeline for president and governor to act on the bills passed by state legislature.
Vice president says Article 142 had become ‘nuclear missile’ against democratic forces in our country.
This decision has sparked debate against judicial activism, judicial restraint and judicial overreach in our country and because of this judiciary is at forefront and judiciary of the country is being scrutinized. But if we shift attention on cases like keshavnanda Bharti , Ayodhya dispute ,Rajiv Gandhi’ s assassination, Chandigarh mayoral polls, vishaka guidelines, Bhopal gas tragedy in all these landmark cases ,Article 142 that deal with complete justice was invoked by Hon’ble Supreme court. This clearly implies that article 142 is helping supreme court of India to come out with judgement that is helping public at large and brings the sense of satisfaction to public that complete justice is done . The critics of the provision of article 142 is of view that it provide excessive discretion to the Hon’ble Supreme court of the country while the view on other side is that article 142 is necessary instrument for providing justice in exceptional circumstances and help in upholding the spirit of constitution.
Use of legal jargon :
Complete justice: It means justice delivered in compliance with principles of fairness and equity , beyond technical application of rules and laws. Through principle of complete justice Hon’ble Supreme court addresses issues that may not be explicitly covered by existing laws or rules in order to deliver just outcomes.
Judicial activism : . Judicial Activism refers to the assertive role played by judiciary in protecting and promoting the rights of citizens.
Judicial overreach : it is against the concept of separation of power. Judicial overreach refers to the circumstances where judiciary start interfering with the functioning of other organs i.e legislative and executive. It is controversial and can lead to the conflict between different branches of the government.
Judicial restraint : It refers to the traditional role played by judiciary such as interpreting laws rather than engaging in policy making.It refers to non inference by judiciary in working of other organs of government.
Discretionary power: Power exercised by judiciary under article 142 is discretionary, which means it is totally up to the Hon’ble court to decide where ,when and how to exercise this power based on the facts and circumstances of case ,to achieve complete justice. But it must be noted that this power is not unlimited and must be exercised in compliance with constitutional principles.
The proof :
The Hon’ble Supreme court’s recent invocation of Article 142 in case of State of Tamil Nadu vs governor of Tamil Nadu, to break a legislative deadlock has reignited debate on the judicial overreach ,with the concerns raised about ‘judicial despotism ’ clashing with the view that such interference by Hon’ble Supreme court is necessary for delivery complete justice.
In some exceptional cases, Supreme court can override even the laws passed by parliament if it seems to the Hon’ble court that is necessary for promotion and protection of rights of citizens, for promoting welfare of public at large . If it appears to the court that strict adherence to the laws would lead to injustice in particular case, and the issue may not be addressed explicitly by existing laws, it can exercise its power under article 142 and hence can fill the gaps in legislation. The earliest reference to the courts extraordinary power under article 142 can be traced back to the case of Pandit M.S.M Sharma vs Sri Krishna Sinha,1958 ,where article 142 was referred to while interpreting the constitution. In it’s initial decades article 142 was rarely invoked by the Hon’ble supreme court. However after 1990 ,the use of article 142 witnessed a sharp increase, coinciding with greater proactive role played by judiciary.
The study conducted by IIM , Ahmedabad reveals that between 1950 and 2023 the supreme court referenced the term complete justice under article 142 in 1579 cases, out of which majority of the cases were civil cases. However, the study also reveals that powers under article 142 was directly invoked by Hon’ble supreme court in 791 cases. From above data, the increasing use of article 142 by judiciary can be clearly interpreted ,which has ignited the debate of judicial overreach.
But at the same time, we need to acknowledge that such interventions are necessary in some extraordinary circumstances, where existing laws are not enough to address the issues raised ,and hence judiciary fills legislation gaps by going beyond strict adherence to the laws . For example, proactive role played by judiciary in providing compensation to the victims of Bhopal gas tragedy 1989 , Vishaka guidelines and in recent case of providing admission to student atul Kumar in IIT Dhanbad ,who has cleared the entrance exam but was not able to make payment of admission fee on the time.
Case Laws
Union carbide corporation vs Union of India ,1988
This case revolves around leakage of 45 tons of methyl isocyanate from union carbide India limited plant in Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh leading to the death of thousands of people immediately and long term health consequences such as respiratory problems ,eye irritation due to the release of toxic gases. In this case Hon’ble Supreme court, exercising the power vested in it under article 142 of Indian constitution ordered union carbide to pay dollar 470 million in compensation to the victims.
The courts decision in this case was significant underscoring the courts ability to deliver justice even when the conventional legal procedures were deemed inadequate.
Vishaka and Ors vs State of Rajasthan,1997
Article 142 with empowers the Hon’ble Supreme court to do complete justice in extraordinary circumstances even when legislative frameworks were deemed inadequate.
In this case Supreme court exercising the power under article 142 ,formulated Vishaka guidelines when legislation to deal with sexual harassment at workplace was inadequate . These guidelines were interim , and dealt with sexual harassment at workplace, until the enactment of Sexual Harassment of women at workplace (Prevention, Prohibition, Redressal )Act 2013.
State of Tamil Nadu vs governor of Tamil Nadu,2025
On 8 April 2025, Hon’ble supreme court of India delivered landmark judgement on Governor’s power under article 200 , ending the long-standing tussle between governor of Tamil Nadu and state of Tamil Nadu over withholding of assent to the bill passed by legislature of Tamil Nadu . This case is centred around withholding of assent by governor of Tamil Nadu on 10 bills passed by state legislature . The Hon’ble Supreme court bench comprising of justice JB Pardiwala and justice R Mahadevan declared withholding of 10 bills by governor as illegal and against constitutional principles. The court declared that all 10 bills that were withheld by governor are deemed to receive assent.
Before this landmark judgement there was no specified time frame for governor to act on the bill passed by state legislature.
Judgment of 8 April has set the time frame regarding governor’s assent to the bill:
If the governor withhold his assent to the bill , the action must be taken within one month.
If the governor decides to withhold assent to the bill against the advice of the state council of ministers, they must return the bill together with a message to the state legislature, and that action must be taken within three month.
If the governor decides to reserve a bill for the consideration of the president contrary to the advice of state council of ministers, such reservation must be made within a maximum period of three months.
If the State legislature re passes a bill (without amendments) after it has been returned by the governor , the governor must grant assent, subject to a maximum period of one month.
The Hon’ble court ruled that governor does not have pocket veto or absolute veto under article 200. Hon’ble Supreme court’s judgement of 8 April appears to set time frame for governor and president to act on the bill passed by state legislature.
Conclusion
The power granted by constitution to the Hon’ble supreme court under article 142 is expansive but not unlimited . India is witnessing debate on the judiciary’s expanding influence clashing with the view that such interventions by judiciary are necessary in extraordinary circumstances , recent remarks by vice president comparing article 142 to nuclear missile and raising questions on judicial accountability has re-ignited this debate.
But as we all know that there are always two sides of coin. On one hand judiciary expanding influence has raised concern of judicial despotism and judicial overreach, such action being considered as against the principle of separation of power , raising question on judicial accountability .
On other hand ,if we scrupulously view the powers of judiciary under article 142 , it clearly shows that such powers are in accordance with doctrine of check and balances , and role played by judiciary under article 142 has largely helped in filling legislative vacuum( when existing laws are inadequate to deliver justice in particular circumstances).
Providing compensation to victims in Bhopal gas tragedy case, framing guidelines to deal with issue of sexual harassment of women at workplace in case of vishaka guidelines, recent case in which supreme court helped atul Kumar in getting admission to IIT when his admission was rejected on failure by him to pay fee on the time, all these cases reflects that such intervention by judiciary are necessary.
Judicial activism -The proactive role played by judiciary to force other two organs of government (legislature and executive) to discharge their constitutional duties is significant.
Such provision are necessary for independence of judiciary in upholding the laws of land, but it should not come at the cost of not being transparent.
FAQS
What is article 142?
Ans-Article 142 of Indian constitution grants Hon’ble Supreme court the power to pass any “decree or order necessary for doing complete justice in any case or matter pending before it ” within the country.
What is judicial activism?
Ans- Judicial Activism denotes the proactive role played by judiciary in the protection of the rights of citizens and in the promotion of justice in society.
What is judicial restraint?
Ans – Judicial restraint : It refers to the traditional role played by judiciary such as interpreting laws rather than engaging in policy making.It refers to non inference by judiciary in working of other organs of government .
