&w=3840&q=100)
Constitution is supreme, all three wings of democracy work under it: CJI
Chief Justice of India B R Gavai on Wednesday said the Constitution of India is supreme, and all three wings of our democracy work under the Constitution.
While some people say that Parliament is supreme, in his opinion the Constitution is paramount, he said.
Justice Gavai, who took oath as the 52nd CJI last month, was speaking at his felicitation in Amravati city of eastern Maharashtra, his hometown.
There is always a discussion as to which wing of democracy -- the executive, legislature or the judiciary -- is supreme, he said.
"While many say and believe that Parliament is supreme, according to me, it is the Constitution of India that is supreme. All three wings of the democracy work under the Constitution," he said.
Referring to a judgment passed by the Apex court on the foundation of the 'Basic Structure' doctrine, CJI Gavai said Parliament has the power to amend, but it can not alter the basic structure of the Constitution.
A judge does not become independent just by passing orders against the government, he further said.
"A judge should always remember that we have a duty, and we are custodians of the rights of citizens and constitutional values and principles. We don't just have power, but a duty is cast upon us," he said.
A judge should not be guided by what people will say or feel about their judgment, the CJI further said.
"We have to think independently. What people will say cannot become a part of our decision-making process," he said.
The CJI asserted that he always let his judgments and work speak, and always stood by the fundamental rights enshrined in the Constitution.
During his speech, the chief justice cited a few of his judgements.
Referring to his judgment against "bulldozer justice", he said the right to shelter is supreme.
CJI Gavai also reminisced about his childhood days on this occasion. While he wanted to be an architect, his father wished that he become a lawyer, he said.
"My father had wanted to become a lawyer but was unable to become one, as at the time he was arrested for being part of the freedom movement," Gavai said.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
an hour ago
- Mint
US Supreme Court curbs federal judges' power, handing Trump major victory on executive authority
The Supreme Court delivered a major victory to President Donald Trump on Friday, sharply limiting federal judges' authority to block presidential policies through nationwide injunctions. In a 6-3 ruling split along ideological lines, Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote that such sweeping orders 'likely exceed the equitable authority' granted to courts, calling them a 'conspicuously nonexistent' practice for most of US history. While the case stemmed from challenges to Trump's executive order denying citizenship to babies of undocumented or temporary residents, the Court deliberately avoided ruling on the order's constitutionality. Instead, Barrett emphasized that courts cannot exercise 'general oversight of the Executive Branch,' effectively dismantling a key check on presidential power that had blocked dozens of Trump's policies. The immediate impact creates legal limbo for birthright citizenship: The policy could take effect in 28 non-challenging states after a 30-day window, potentially creating a 'patchwork' system where citizenship rules differ by state. Justice Sonia Sotomayor's dissent, read aloud in a rare display of protest, blasted the majority for enabling 'gamesmanship' and issuing 'an open invitation for the Government to bypass the Constitution'. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson similarly warned the ruling permits the executive to 'violate the Constitution with respect to anyone who has not yet sued,' concluding her dissent without the traditional 'respectfully' as a pointed rebuke. The Court suggested challengers pivot to class-action lawsuits, a path immigration advocates immediately pursued in Maryland and New Hampshire filings. Trump celebrated the decision as a 'monumental victory' against 'radical left judges,' while Attorney General Pam Bondi denounced 'rogue judges' who had issued 35 injunctions against Trump policies from just five districts. Legally, the ruling empowers Trump to revive stalled policies like transgender healthcare and refugee resettlement. However, constitutional scholars warn it risks 'chaotic' outcomes, including potential statelessness for newborns and conflicting state-level citizenship standards.
Economic Times
an hour ago
- Economic Times
How the Emergency makes us immune to democracy damage
Agencies Representational Each year at midnight, June 25-26, I wish my mother a very happy birthday. This year, I was late by 15 minutes as I got caught up 'doing the dishes'. I've put that in quotes not because 'doing the dishes' is a euphemism for some nefarious midnight activity involving my sole contact in the PMO, but because putting something like that in quotes can immediately arouse the suspicion of said O, and keep them on their toes. The thing is, my mother's birthday falls on the anniversary of the Emergency. She turned 33 a few minutes after president Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed signed and sent back the draft declaration using provisions of Article 352 of the Constitution to impose an internal emergency. Looking at Abu Abraham's famous cartoon - published some six months into Emergency - of Ali Ahmed stretching out from a Rashtrapati-tub to return pen and paper to an outstretched hand 'symbol' behind the door, I suitably-bootably wonder whether such a cartoon would have passed today. Not so much for its critique of an obsequious nominal head of state, as much for its depiction of a president in his birthday suit. So, even being the luckiest guy to have the least authoritarian of mothers, my mum's birthday is inextricably linked with Emergency. As Srinath Raghavan's illuminating new biography, Indira Gandhi and the Years That Transformed India, reveal, an emergency under Article 352 was already in place since December 1971 during the Bangladesh War. But Mrs G wanted a new emergency - her One Big Beautiful Emergency, if you will. Much before June 12, 1975, when Allahabad High Court found her guilty of corruption in the March 1971 general election - a case filed by Raj Narain of Samyukta Socialist Party, whom she defeated by more than 1 lakh votes at Rae Bareli - Gandhi 'came to regard the dangers posed by the RSS' activism as linked to an American-supported attempt at destabilising her government'. Assassination of her aide, cabinet minister, and Congress fundraiser LN Mishra in January 1975 didn't help matters. Gandhi wanted to crack down on RSS, and Ananda Margis, by invoking an all-encompassing emergency even before the Allahabad High Court verdict. As Raghavan reminds us, 'Far from being lawful, the declaration of emergency on 25 June 1975 was a coup d'etat: in the original sense of the term a 'master-stroke of the state,' whose signature elements were surprise and secrecy.' Like every year, the media and its content-providers rolled out thoughts on the Emergency this year, too - the one day that LK Advani is taken out of the freezer and thawed for his 'bend-crawl' aphorism. But for all the righteous horror poured on 'the day democracy died', 50 years on, the Emergency has a new function: as insurance against any charge that India today could possibly be anything other than a model democracy. One extremely handy thing about any 'darkest chapter in history' is that it allows 'dark chapters' to come across as gentle gambols in the park. Take the Jewish holocaust. After that particular Nazi pol science field study, you seriously reckon Israel can be charged of genocide for its 'tough love' with Gaza? With countries like Germany falling for it faster than you can say, 'Fast and the Fuhrious', the upper-cased 'Holocaust' is brought out like garlic and crucifix to drive away any accusation of lower-cased 'holocaust' being carried out by Israeli ghetto-blasters. The same principle holds with our Emergency. Mention any current dodge'n'damage to democratic institutions by the state - whether GoI or state governments - and 'Emergency' is trotted out like Asrani with a toothbrush moustache. Umar Khalid, almost five years in Tihar without a trial, charges against whom have yet to framed in court? 'Pfft. That's nothing compared to what happened during the Emergency'. The other standard rebuttal being, 'Have you seen Pakistan?' Which is why, after 'doing the dishes' with Pontius Pilate diligence, and wishing Ma on Thursday, I realised why so many people are horrified by Donald Trump, his ICEmen, executive orders, sending military to quell protestors, using social media telepathy to weed out bad apples from entering America, his sycophantasmagoric coterie... Poor things, they have no Indira's Emergency to measure Trump's Urgency against, and find phew-relief like we do. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this column are that of the writer. The facts and opinions expressed here do not reflect the views of Elevate your knowledge and leadership skills at a cost cheaper than your daily tea. The bike taxi dreams of Rapido, Uber, and Ola just got a jolt. But they're winning public favour Second only to L&T, but controversies may weaken this infra powerhouse's growth story Punit Goenka reloads Zee with Bullet and OTT focus. Can he beat mighty rivals? 3 critical hurdles in India's quest for rare earth independence HDB Financial may be cheaper than Bajaj Fin, but what about returns? Why Sebi must give up veto power over market infra institutions These large- and mid-cap stocks can give more than 23% return in 1 year, according to analysts Are short-term headwinds from China an opportunity? 8 auto stocks: Time to be contrarian? Buy, Sell or Hold: Motilal Oswal initiates coverage on Supreme Industries; UBS initiates coverage on PNB Housing
New Indian Express
an hour ago
- New Indian Express
Burnt cash case: Why SC panel recommended HC judge's impeachment
When Parliament convenes for its monsoon session on July 21, one issue on which there ought to be wide consensus is the impeachment of former Delhi High Court judge Yashwant Varma. Sacks of partially burnt Rs500 currency notes found in the storeroom of his official residence, 30, Tughlaq Crescent, New Delhi during an accidental fire - captured on camera on the intervening night of March 14-15 - threw up questions of judicial integrity. One of the videos has an audio referring to the burning currency as 'Mahatma Gandhi me aag lag rahi hai' (is burning). That the storeroom was cleaned up and the notes went missing the next morning, but some burnt fragments of the bank notes were later found on the Tughlaq Crescent lane by lay people added to the mystery. Justice Varma, his family and personal staff flatly denied there was any currency note in the room. But by then the photos and videos had reached the then Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna. The CJI took the extraordinary decision of putting the visuals and Justice Varma's denial in public domain. However, when an in-house probe panel's report indicted the judge, he recommended his impeachment but refrained from placing the report in public domain. The media got hold of the 64-page report which possibly built a watertight case against Justice Varma. Curiously, no first information report (FIR) has been filed against the crime yet. Also, no committee has been constituted to investigate the allegations against Justice Varma under the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968, which is mandatory. At a recent meeting of a parliamentary committee on law and justice, several MPs asked why no FIR has been lodged over the matter. While the government is trying to build parliamentary consensus for impeachment, the Opposition is yet to take a final call. There are divergent views on whether another probe panel under the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968 needs to be constituted. While one section considers the in-house panel's report as just a fact-finding exercise, others see it differently. The bigger question is the source of the ill-gotten wealth, which the panel did not answer. The matter will not get quietus unless the source of the funds is outed.
