Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
V.R. KRISHNA IYER, J.
Smt. Indira Nehru Gandhi, Appellant
Versus
Raj Narain and another, Respondents.
Civil Misc. Petn. No. 887 of 1975, Civil Misc. Petn. No. 3557 of 1975, D/-24-6-1975.
–While the right to appeal is statutory, the power to stay is discretionary. But judicial discretion-indeed, even execution discretion - cannot run riot. The former, though plenary is governed in its exercise by sound guidelines, and Courts look for light, inter alia, from practice and precedent, without however being hide-bound mechanically by the past alone. After all, judicial power of a dynamic, forward looking and socially luscent and award. Arguments about public sentiment, political propriety and moral compulsion, though touched upon at the bar and relevant at other levels, for beyond the conventional judicial orbit and have to be discriminately shifted. If national crises and democratic considerations, and not mere balance of convenience and interest of “justice” were to be major inputs in the Judge’s exercise discretion, systemic changes and shifts in judicial attitude may perhaps be needed — Indira Nehru Gandhi v. Raj Narain, AIR 1975 SC 1590.
–In the case of Indira Nehru Gandhi v. Raj Narain, AIR 1975 SC 1590, the arguments runs, her advocate induced the High Court into granting a stay by misrepresenting that if the judgment came into immediate effect, the national government would be paralysed for want of a Prime Minister and so time was needed for the ruling party to elect a new leader to head the Government. Taken in by this alleged critical need of the democratic process, the learned Judge granted 20 days stay. This spell, ingeniously secured, was perverted to consolidate her leadership, not a find a successor. If this version of the respondent were veracious, the petitioner’s conduct were dubious, as observed and that the Supreme Court observed that there were no good reasons to reject the petitioner’s plea that the choice of an alternative leader was left to her party that she did what she could in the spirit of representation to Court and did not what she could not viz., to force her partymen to push her aside for the nonce for the Court’s satisfaction. In these matters one has to go by prima facie materials and probabilities. The objection as to unclean hands, was overruled.
–As held in the case of Indira Nehru Gandhi v. Raj Narain, AIR 1975 SC 1590, when the Court was considering whether a stay should be granted or not, it was premature and unwise to pronounce on the merits of the appeal itself except where the judgment contained grotesque errors, absurd conclusions or grossly erroneous propositions of law.
–It was held in Indira Nehri Gandhi v. Raj Narain, AIR 1975 SC 1590, that there will be no legal embargo on her holding the office of Prime Minister. However, this legal sequitur of the situation arising from the stay of the judgment and order of the High Court, including the suspension of the disqualification.
– in the case of Indira Nehru Gandhi v. Raj Narain, AIR 1975 SC 1590, the argument runs, her advocate induced the High Court into granting a stay by misrepresenting that if the judgment came into immediate effect, the national government would be paralysed for want of a Prime Minister and so time was needed for the ruling party to elect a new leader to head the Government. Taken in by this alleged critical need of the democratic process, the learned Judge granted 20 days stay. This spell, ingeniously secured, was perverted to consolidate her leadership, not to find a successor. If this version of the respondent were veracious, the petitioner’s conduct were dubious, as observed and that the Supreme Court would not condone such “solemn mockery”. The Supreme Court observed that there were no good reasons to reject the petitioner’s plea that the choice of an alternative leader was left to her party that she did what she could in the spirit of representation to Court and did not what she could not viz, to force her partymen to push her aside for the nonce for the Court’s satisfaction. In these matters one has to go by prima facie materials and probabilities. The objection as to unclean hands, was overruled.
Judgment
V. R. KRISHNA IYER, J.:- Right at the beginning, I must record appreciation of the valuable assistance given by counsel on both sides to the Court in clarifying the twilt aspects and unravelling the latent facets of what, viewed in typically isolated legal perspective, untuned to the national wave-length and unclouded by the dust -storms of politics is a humdrum case. Having regard to the obstreperous environs and mounting tensions surrounding the events following upon the judgment of the Allahabad High Court, it must be stated to the credit of Shri Palkhivala and Shri Shanti Bhushan that in their suave submissions they have shown how sound and fury only help thwart the thought-ways of law and extra-legal tumults can be walled off from the Court hall. The arguments have been largely legal and their merits have to be weighed in judicial scales. What, perhaps in a certain view, are not strictly pertinent to the stay proceedings have, however, been adverted to at the bar, inevitably and understandably, but within marginal limits, if I may say so, because the proceedings in the Halls of Justice must be informed, to some extent, by the great verity that the broad sweep of human history is guided by sociological forces beyond the ken of the noisy hour or the quirk of legal nicety. Life is larger than Law. Now I proceed to discuss the merits of the matter.
2. The appellant has moved this Court challenging the unseating verdict against her by the High Court. She has also sought absolute stay of the judgment and order under appeal. Entering a caveat, the respondent has also appeared through counsel and opposed the grant of stay,
3. While the right to appeal is statutory, the power to stay is discretionary. But judicial discretion-indeed, even executive discretion - cannot run riot. The former, though plenary, is governed in its exercise by sound guidelines, and courts look for light, inter alia, from practice and precedent, without however being hide-bound mechanically by the past alone. After all, judicial power is dynamic, forward-looking and socially luscent and aware. I mention this dimension of judge-power because the industry and ingenuity of both lawyers have unearthed prior instances zigzagging now and then but substantially striking the same note, A few orders from the debris of old records have been brought up which seem to suggest variations in the type of stay granted by the higher courts. I shall have occasion to dilate on them a little later, Suffice it to note that the power of the court must rise to the occasion, if justice, in its larger connotation, is the goal-and it is.
4. Having regard to the historic power-stakes involved in this election appeal and stay proceeding, vigorous arguments, marked by strokes of heat and flashes of light, have been heard in this application for stay and the time consumed at the bar has been considerably more than ,when like matters have been routinely dealt with by this Court. Let it be plainly understood that the Court decides forensic questions without getting embroiled in non-legal disputes working as it does in a sound-proof system of sorts. Moreover, notwithstanding the unusual, though natural, excitement and importance surrounding the case, the Court is the quiet of the storm center and views, with an equal eye, the claims on each side, taking judicial note of the high issues and balance of convenience in the wider context. Arguments about public sentiment, political propriety and moral compulsion though touched upon at the bar and relevant at other levels, fall beyond the conventional judicial orbit and have to be discriminatingly sifted. Nevertheless, Shri Palkhivala has pressed before me the propriety and urgency of the Court taking into consideration the national situation even while exercising its discretionary power. As a counter- weight to this submission, Shri Shanti Bhushan has claimed that no republic can surrender its democratic destiny to a single soul witho
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
