ARTICLE 142 OF THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION

Article 142 of the Indian Constitution provides a unique power to the Supreme Court, to do complete justice between the parties, where, at times, the law or statute may not provide a remedy. In those situations, the court can extend itself to put an end to a dispute in a manner that would fit the facts of the case. While the powers under Article 142 are extraordinary in nature, the apex court has defined its scope and extent through its judgments over time.

WHY WAS ARTICLE 142 INCLUDED IN THE CONSTITUTION?

• Article 142 was envisaged to allow the Supreme Court the opportunity to provide complete justice to even those who may have been wrongly sentenced or denied justice due to the intricacies or inefficacies of the legal justice system. 
• The article was meant to empower the apex court to deliver justice in exceptional cases without being hindered by legal or bureaucratic red tape.

IMPORTANCE OF ARTICLE 142 OF THE CONSTITUTION

1. Transcending Legal Limitations

• Article 142 empowers the Supreme Court to go beyond the constraints of existing laws or statutes to ensure justice is served.
• This is particularly crucial in cases where rigid application of the law might lead to injustice or where there are gaps in legislation.

2. Exercising Executive and Legislative Functions

• The article grants the Supreme Court the authority to perform functions typically reserved for the executive and legislative branches of government.
•  This includes issuing directives, guidelines, or orders to government bodies or other authorities when necessary to uphold justice and protect rights.

3. Intervention in Matters of Public Interest and Rights Protection

• Article 142 enables the Supreme Court to intervene in cases involving public interest, human rights, constitutional values, or fundamental rights.
• It empowers the court to safeguard these interests and rights from violation or infringement, ensuring that justice prevails.

4. Binding Order

• Any decree or order passed under Article 142 is enforceable throughout India.

5. Enhancing the Supreme Court's Role

• By providing the Supreme Court with such broad discretionary powers, Article 142 reinforces its position as the guardian of the constitution and the ultimate interpreter of the law.
•  It allows the court to actively engage in shaping legal outcomes, promoting judicial activism, and fostering innovation in legal interpretation and application.

SIGNIFICANCE OF ARTICLE 142

1. Ensuring Justice Beyond Law

• Article 142 empowers the Court to address situations where existing laws and procedures lack adequate remedies. 

2. Promoting Social Justice

• The Court has used Article 142 to address issues like prison reforms, environmental protection, and the rights of marginalized communities.
• Landmark judgments like the Vishaka Guidelines and the right to education involved its invocation.

3. Flexibility and Adaptability

• Unlike rigid laws, the Court can tailor its orders under Article 142 to specific circumstances, enabling dynamic responses to evolving situations.

4. Deterrence and Enforcement

• The Court’s ability to take suo moto action can deter potential violations of fundamental rights and act as a powerful enforcement mechanism for upholding existing laws.

LANDMARK JUDGEMENTS

1. Sheela Barse vs. Maharashtra (1983)

• Addressing prison conditions and lack of basic amenities, the Court laid down minimum standards for prison reforms, emphasizing the humane treatment of prisoners.

2. Olga Tellis vs. Bombay Municipal Corporation (1985)

• The Court recognized the right to shelter as a part of the right to life under Article 21, ordering the rehabilitation of slum dwellers facing eviction, marking a shift towards protecting informal settlements.

3. M.C. Mehta vs. Union of India (1987)

• In this landmark case concerning environmental pollution, the Court invoked Article 142 to issue the polluter pays principle, holding industries liable for environmental damage.

4. Bhopal gas tragedy case (Union Carbide Corporation vs Union of India), 1991 

• The SC ordered UCC to pay $470 million in compensation for the victims of the tragedy.

5. Vishaka Guidelines on Sexual Harassment (1997)

• In the absence of specific legislation on sexual harassment at workplaces, the Court issued these guidelines outlining a framework for prevention, prohibition, and redressal of sexual harassment, setting a crucial precedent.

6. Right to Education (2002)

• In response to widespread illiteracy and lack of access to education, the Court declared the right to free and compulsory education for children between 6 and 14 years a fundamental right under Article 21, impacting millions of children.

7. Irretrievable Breakdown of Marriage (2023)

• The Court in cases where there is irretrievable breakdown of marriage then dissolution of marriage is the only solution and this Court can grant a decree of divorce in exercise of its power under Article 142 of the Constitution of India.

KEY BENEFITS OF ARTICLE 142

1. Protecting Rights and Upholding Constitutional Ideals

• One of the significant benefits of Article 142 is that it allows the judiciary, particularly the Supreme Court, to step in and protect people's rights and uphold constitutional principles when other branches of the government fail to do so.
•  This ensures that justice is not compromised and that constitutional values are upheld.

2. Filling Legislative Gaps

• Article 142 enables the judiciary to address legislative gaps by issuing orders or directives to fill in the voids left by the legislature.
• This helps in ensuring that there are no legal vacuums and that justice can be effectively administered even in situations where there is no specific law applicable.

3. Establishing Checks and Balances

• By allowing the Supreme Court to intervene and establish norms or guidelines, Article 142 contributes to the system of checks and balances within the government.
• It ensures that no branch of the government oversteps its bounds and that each operates within the framework of the Constitution.

CRITICISMS OF ARTICLE 142

1. Arbitrary Exercise

• Critics argue that the broad discretionary powers conferred by Article 142 may lead to arbitrary exercise or potential misuse by the judiciary.
• Without clear guidelines or limitations, there is a risk that judicial decisions could be influenced by personal biases or extraneous factors.

2. Ambiguity in Interpretation

• The phrasecomplete justice is subjective and open to interpretation, leading to ambiguity in its application.
•  This subjective nature of the provision can result in inconsistent rulings and difficulties in ensuring uniformity and predictability in the legal system.

3. Lack of Accountability

• Unlike the legislative and executive branches, the judiciary is not directly accountable to the electorate or other governmental bodies for its actions under Article 142.
• Critics argue that this lack of direct accountability undermines democratic principles and checks on judicial power.

4. Judicial Overreach

• There are concerns that the broad powers granted by Article 142 may enable the judiciary to overstep its boundaries and encroach upon the domain of the legislature and executive.
• Critics fear that such judicial overreach could undermine the separation of powers doctrine, which is fundamental to the functioning of a democratic system.

5. Violation of Separation of Powers Doctrine

• Article 142 has been criticized for potentially violating the separation of powers doctrine, which aims to prevent any one branch of government from becoming too powerful.
• By allowing the judiciary to exercise functions typically reserved for the legislature and executive, some argue that Article 142 blurs the lines between the branches of government, leading to an imbalance of power.

VIEWS BY THE SUPREME COURT ON THE CRITICISM

1. Prem Chand Garg case (1962)

• SC held that an order to do complete justice should be consistent with the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution, and also with the substantive provisions of the relevant statutory laws.

2. Supreme Court Bar Association vs Union of India 1998

• Powers under Article 142 are supplementary and curative in nature and could not be used to supplant or override a substantive law and build a new edifice where none existed earlier.

3. A. Jideranath vs Jubilee Hills Co-op House Building Society, 2006

• The Supreme Court discussed the scope of the power here, holding that in its exercise no injustice should be caused to a person not party to the case.

4. State of Karnataka vs Umadevi 2006

• The apex court has imposed checks on its own power under Article 142.
• It clarified that complete justice means justice according to law and not sympathy, while holding that it will not grant a relief which would amount to perpetuating an illegality encroaching into the legislative domain.