The Power Under Order XXXVIII, Rule 5 CPC is Drastic and Extraordinary; Should Not Be Exercised Mechanically or Merely for the Asking: Calcutta High Court Telangana High Court Strikes Down Section 10-A: Upholds Transparency in Public Employment Absence of Homogeneous Mixing and Procedural Deficiencies Vitiate NDPS Conviction: Punjab and Haryana High Court Business Disputes Cannot Be Given Criminal Color: Patna High Court Quashes Complaint in Trademark Agreement Case Gujarat High Court Appoints Wife as Guardian of Comatose Husband, Calls for Legislative Framework Standard of Proof in Professional Misconduct Requires 'Higher Threshold' but Below 'Beyond Reasonable Doubt: Delhi High Court Imprisonment Cannot Bar Education: Bombay HC Allows UAPA Accused to Pursue LL.B. High Court Acquits Accused in Double Murder Case, Asserts ‘Suspicion Cannot Replace Proof’ Calcutta High Court Allows Amendment of Pleadings Post-Trial: Necessary for Determining Real Questions in Controversy Exaggerated Allegations in Matrimonial Disputes Cause Irreparable Suffering, Even Acquittal Can't Erase Scars: Supreme Court Quashes FIR Against Relatives in Matrimonial Dispute Consent Requires Active Deliberation; False Promise of Marriage Must Be Proximate Cause for Sexual Relations: Supreme Court Urgency Clause in Land Acquisition for Yamuna Expressway Upheld: Supreme Court Affirms Public Interest in Integrated Development Interest Rate of 24% Compounded Annually Held Excessive; Adjusted to Ensure Fairness in Loan Transactions: AP HC Prosecution Under IPC After Factories Act Conviction Violates Article 20(2): Bombay High Court Join Our Exclusive Lawyer E News WhatsApp Group!

NO FURTHER EXTENSION TO DIRECTOR OF ENFORCEMENT: SUPREME COURT

04 September 2024 10:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has delivered a landmark judgment reaffirming the separation of powers and the authority of judicial pronouncements. The judgment, delivered by a bench comprising Hon'ble Mr. Justice B.R. Gavai, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vikram Nath, and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, has restrained the government from granting any further extensions to the Director of Enforcement beyond the specified tenure.

Highlighting the sanctity of a writ of mandamus issued by the Court, the judgment stated, "Nullification of mandamus by an enactment would be impermissible legislative exercise." The Court further emphasized that the legislature cannot override individual decisions inter partes and affect their rights and liabilities alone, as it would amount to an intrusion into the judicial power of the state.

The judgment comes in response to writ petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the Central Vigilance Commission (Amendment) Act, 2021, and the Delhi Special Police Establishment (Amendment) Act, 2021. Rejecting the challenge, the Court held that the impugned Acts and rules were not violative of fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution.

Citing previous precedents, the Court underscored that while the legislature can change the basis of a decision and modify the law in general, it cannot nullify a specific mandamus issued by the Court. The Court also acknowledged the concern expressed by the Union of India regarding the FATF review and the need for a smooth transition, allowing the current Director of Enforcement to continue in office until 31st July 2023.

This judgment sets a significant precedent, upholding the authority of the judiciary and ensuring the adherence to the principles of separation of powers and the rule of law. It reaffirms the importance of judicial review and prevents legislative encroachment on individual rights and liabilities.

Date of Decision: July 11, 2023

DR. JAYA THAKUR  vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS. 

Similar News