Constitutional Basis
Article 142 grants the Supreme Court (SC) extraordinary powers to ensure “complete justice” in cases before it. This provision transcends conventional judicial boundaries, enabling the Court to issue directives, decrees, or orders that may even override statutory limitations to address legal voids or societal inequities.
Scope & Significance
- Judicial Innovation:
- Acts as a safety valve to remedy legislative or executive inertia. For instance, in Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan (1997), the SC framed guidelines against workplace sexual harassment, filling a legal vacuum until the 2013 POSH Act.
- Used to enforce constitutional morality, as seen in Shayara Bano (2017), where the SC banned instant triple talaq.
- Balancing Rights & Realities:
- Allows the SC to harmonize legal rigidity with societal needs. In the Bhopal Gas Tragedy case (1989), the Court ordered Union Carbide to pay $470 million as compensation, prioritizing victims’ rights over procedural delays.
- Public Interest & Human Rights:
- Empowers the SC to intervene in cases involving mass rights violations, environmental crises, or institutional corruption. Example: Directing the Assam government to rehabilitate victims of ethnic violence in Sarbananda Sonowal v. UOI (2005).
Judicial Activism vs. Restraint
- Expansive Use:
- Liquor Ban Case (2016): SC banned liquor sales along highways to curb accidents, despite lack of explicit legislative backing.
- Adultery Decriminalization (2018): Struck down Section 497 IPC, terming it patriarchal, under Article 142.
- Checks & Balances:
- The Court often self-limits to avoid encroaching on legislative domains. In Kalpana Mehta v. UOI (2018), it clarified that Article 142 cannot be used to bypass statutory frameworks.
Interplay with Other Constitutional Provisions
- Article 32 (Right to Constitutional Remedies): Complements Article 142 by enabling the SC to enforce FRs through writs.
- Article 141 (Law Declared by SC is Binding): Ensures precedents set under Article 142 guide lower courts.
- Article 144 (Civil & Judicial Authorities to Act in Aid of SC): Reinforces compliance with SC’s orders.
Criticism & Controversies
- Judicial Overreach: Critics argue that frequent use of Article 142 undermines separation of powers (e.g., NJAC Judgment, 2015, where the SC struck down a constitutional amendment).
- Ambiguity: Lack of clear guidelines on its application leads to inconsistent rulings.
Global Parallels
Similar doctrines exist in other democracies:
- UK: Inherent jurisdiction of courts to ensure fairness.
- US: Equity jurisdiction under federal courts.
Way Forward
- Law Commission’s 273rd Report (2017) recommended codifying principles for Article 142’s application to prevent arbitrariness.
- Strengthen institutional dialogue between judiciary, legislature, and executive.
Conclusion
Article 142 embodies the SC’s role as the custodian of constitutional conscience, enabling it to adapt justice delivery to India’s evolving socio-legal fabric.
UPSC Relevance
- GS-II: Role of judiciary in governance; judicial activism vs. overreach.
- Essay: Balancing justice delivery with constitutional boundaries.
- Case Studies: Use in environmental rulings (e.g., Taj Trapezium Case), gender justice, and electoral reforms.