ARTICLE 142: A NEED FOR JUDICIAL RESTRAINT
Keywords:
Extraordinary Powers, case laws, suggestive measures, Article 142, provisions, judicialAbstract
This research paper attempts to focus on the ?Extraordinary Powers? of the Supreme Court.How it was being used to help the deceased person in those cases where the present existing statutory provisions were inefficient to tackle it but there were several instances in which the court misutilised its power conferred by Article 142 and hence a need for the restraint of this judicial power was felt.This research paper also attempts to give some suggestive measures so as to maintain the balance between the powers conferred to the court by virtue of Article 142 and present existing statutory laws.Various recent case laws pertinent to the topic has also been referred and discussed in detail for better understanding of the main objective of the paper.
References
1. Weisenberg WK. Why our judges and courts a re important. Feb 1, 2018. retrieved from http://www.abajournal.com
2. Cicero M. January 3, 106 BC —December 7, 43 BC; Roman philosopher, statesman, lawyer, political theorist, and Roma n constitutionalist; widely considered to be one of Rome ’s greatest orato rs and prose stylists.
3. Pathak H. Article 142: Incomplete Justice? Jan 2013. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/2 70159487
4. Dr. Justice Chauhan. B.S. (n.d.). Court and its endeavor to do complete justice . Retrieved fromhttp://www.nja.nic.in
5. Constitution of India, art. 142.
6. Chandrakant Patil v. State, (1998) 3 SCC 38 (S.C.)
7. Sen A. The Idea of Justice . Penguin Publications. 2009; 12.
8. Sen A. The Idea of Justice. Penguin Publications. 2009; 12-15.
9. Ashok Kumar Gupta v. State of Uttar Pradesh, (1997) 5 SCC 201 (S.C.).
10. Rawls J. A Theory of Justice . Harvard University Press. 1971. A. Jidenranath v. Jubilee Hills Co -Op. House Building Society, (2006) 10 SCC 96 (S.C.).
11. Basu DD. Commentary on the Constitution of India . Lexis Nexis® Butterworths Wadhwa 2009; 5: 5993.
12. (2004) 5 SCC 353.
13. (2005) AIR SC 972.
14. (2004) 4 SCC 666.
15. (2000) 9 SCC 754.
16. (2005) 1 SCC 88
17. (1994) 5 SCC 545
18. Jain MP. Indian Constitution Law with Constitutional Documents . Lexis Nexis® Butterworths Wadhwa 2010; 1: 370.
19. (1963) AIR SC 996.
20. (1988) AIR SC 1531.
21. (1998) 4 SCC 409 (S.C.).
22. (1991) AIR SC 2176 at 2210.
23. State of Uttar Pradesh v. Poosu . (1976) AIR SC 1750 (S.C.)
24. (1995) 2 SCC 621.
25. (1998) AIR SC 1985.
26. Supreme Court Ba r Associat ion v. Union of India. (1998) 4 SCC 409 (S.C.) at 1909. JCLJ (2018) 14-20 © Law Journals 2018. All Rights Reserved Page 20
27. (2004) AIR SC 1050.
28. (2006) AIR SC 1806 at 36.
29. (2014) 9 SCC 516.
30. (2016) SCC Online SC 1487. Cite this Article Ashish Srivastava, A Need for Judicial Restraint. Journal of Constitutional Law and Jurisprudence. 2018; 1(2): 14–20p.
