“Possession Follows Title” Not An Absolute Rule When Ownership Is Disputed: Andhra Pradesh High Court ORDER 30 CPC | Appeal Filed by Firm Does Not Abate on Death of Partners: Calcutta High Court Bank Cannot Freeze Customer’s Account Based on Third-Party Dispute: Calcutta High Court Slams Axis Bank Not Every Middleman Is a Trafficker: Gujarat High Court Grants Bail in International Cyber Trafficking Case, Cites Absence of Mens Rea Stay in One Corner Freezes the Whole Map: Madras High Court Upholds Validity of Decades-Old Land Acquisition Despite 11-Year Delay in Award Parole Once Granted Cannot Be Made Illusory by Imposing Impossible Conditions: Rajasthan High Court Declares Mechanical Surety Requirement for Indigent Convicts Unconstitutional Once Acquisition Is Complete, Title Disputes Fall Outside Civil Court Jurisdiction: Madhya Pradesh High Court No Appeal Lies Against Lok Adalat Compromise Decree Even on Grounds of Fraud: Orissa High Court Declares First Appeal Not Maintainable POCSO | Absence of Medical Corroboration Not Fatal; Sole Testimony of Minor Victim Sufficient for Conviction: Orissa High Court Limitation Act | Article 137 Applies to Applications Under Order 9 Rule 7 CPC; 3-Year Limit Cannot Be Rendered Illusory: Punjab & Haryana High Court Benami Defence Cannot Override Registered Ownership: Delhi High Court Buries 35-Year-Old Family Settlement Claim Over Property Dispute Off-Road Construction Vehicles Not ‘Motor Vehicles’ Under Law: Supreme Court Quashes Road Tax on Dumpers, Excavators, and Dozers

SUPREME COURT JUDGMENT DECLARES SECTION 6A OF DSPE ACT UNCONSTITUTIONAL WITH RETROACTIVE EFFECT - NOT JUST INOPERATIVE PROSPECTIVELY - NEVER HAD ANY LEGAL STANDING SINCE ITS INTRODUCTION

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


  On 11 September 2023: In a landmark decision that has sent shockwaves through the legal and political spheres, the Supreme Court of India, in a unanimous ruling by a five-judge bench led by Chief Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul, declared Section 6A of the Delhi Special Police Establishment (DSPE) Act unconstitutional with retroactive effect. This judgment is poised to redefine the contours of constitutional law and administrative action in India.

The court's observation, which is reverberating across legal circles, is as follows: "A statute declared unconstitutional by a court of law is non est for all purposes." This statement is a clear pronouncement that Section 6A of the DSPE Act is not just inoperative prospectively but has never had any legal standing since its introduction in 2003.

The judgment is underpinned by a meticulous examination of constitutional provisions, Acts, and precedents. It hinges on the interpretation of Article 13 of the Constitution of India. The court clarified that Article 13(1) applies to pre-Constitution laws, rendering them void only from the date of the Constitution's commencement in 1950. However, Article 13(2) comes into play when post-Constitution laws are declared void ab initio, making them null and void from their inception.

The bench emphasized that Section 6A of the DSPE Act falls under Article 13(2), and therefore, its unconstitutionality renders it void ab initio. This means that it was never a valid legal provision since its inception on September 11, 2003.

The ramifications of this decision are profound. It affects a multitude of cases, including investigations and prosecutions conducted under Section 6A, raising questions about their validity. Legal experts predict a flurry of petitions seeking redress and review of past judgments impacted by this retrospective declaration.

Notably, the judgment has raised discussions on the applicability of this precedent to other laws declared unconstitutional by the courts. Legal scholars are closely monitoring how this decision will shape future debates on the retrospective application of constitutional declarations.

Section 6A of the DSPE Act had been a contentious provision that required prior approval from the government before investigating corruption cases involving officers of the rank of Joint Secretary and above. Critics argued that it impeded effective anti-corruption measures and was susceptible to misuse.

Supreme Court's ruling on Section 6A of the DSPE Act has far-reaching implications for India's legal landscape, administrative functioning, and the pursuit of justice. It underscores the judiciary's commitment to upholding the constitution and ensuring accountability, even when reviewing legislation retrospectively.

Date of Decision: September 11, 2023

CBI vs R.R. KISHORE            

           

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/11-Sep-2023_CBI_Vs_R.R.Kishore.pdf"]

Latest Legal News