Constitutionality of Intervention of SC in Presidents power of deciding on mercy pleas

Intervention of SC in Presidents power of deciding on mercy pleas without any time limit boundation, is it constitutional?

No authority can fix a deadline for the president to execute his responsibility.

However, in death penalty cases, the affected can plead this as a reason for seeking mercy.

Can the SC Intervene?

That's what exactly I was saying. The court cannot set deadline for executing presidential powers.

Again here, he may get some relief from the court. But the authority of the president cannot be questioned.

Sir but finally commuting like in Bhullar case with reason of over mental illness and an inordinate delay by the government in deciding his mercy plea, isn't it breaching president's power?

Actually, it is a grey area.

It goes through the home ministry and the pm with the recommendation of the govt. They can be held responsible for the delay. After reaching the president, it becomes his prerogative

More Courts an answer for pendency of cases?

Who has control over establishing lower courts? Why can't more courts be established for doing away with backlog cases?

Do u think that solves the problem?

Fast track court was one devised mechanism to reduce pendency and dispose cases at the earliest. Lok adalats for amicable settlement of cases.

Establishing more courts is gonna add to the burden of expenditure but not solve the problem per se.

If rules under the Enactments are adhered to it can reduce pendency.

Say Procedural code says only 3 adjournments can be taken.. But in actual this is not followed and n number of adjournments are sought and granted which drags the cases

Due Process of Law - Maneka Gandhi Case

Any case other than menaka case where judiciary laid emphasis on due process of law? And what is impact of due process clause on law making now?

Maneka Gandhi case is a landmark one.. It still holds ground and has been reiterated in many number of cases later also by the Courts. It still holds it strong footing.

There is a basic difference between procedure established by law and due process of law which was distinguished by the courts in Maneka Gandhi''s case.

Maneka Gandhi Case struck down Section 10 of the Passport Act (if I remember the section very correctly)

Supreme Court in Maneka case also said that right to life also includes right to livelihood, shelter etc. But still there are many instances where housing is still not available to many.

Right to Shelter was propounded as an inherent right under Article 21..

Is there any difference between principle of natural justice (PNJ & DPL) and due process law?

Principles of Natural Justice and Due process of law are almost analogous to each other far diffcult to distinguish them.

So can someone approach sc regarding this issue?

Theoretically yes, they can approach the SC. as a violation of FR

Suo-moto Jurisdiction of Indian Courts

Under what circumstances can the courts of country take Suo-moto action? Doesn't this executive oversight digress Judiciary from its main function of speedy justice?

There is no separate guideline for a court to take cognizance of any matter.

Suo-motto action is an inherent power of the court. Mostly higher Judiciary.

It can never be said that Judiciary is digressing from it prime duty of rendering justice.

So practically, higher courts of the country can take cognizance of any matter. For example- recently SC took suo moto action on the status of Ganga cleaning.

Yes

For example.. Epistolary jurisdiction of the judiciary, it is nowhere written.

It is the power of the court to take cognizance of a matter based on a letter addressed to it.

This power u see Amar, cannot deter the separation of Powers (though Limited in India ) that we follow..

Tracking executive actions and making sure they're held accountable- that is also under the definition of conventional "Justice"? In addition to the civil and criminal adversarial matters- which are considered as conventional forms of justice.

That will destroy the natural Balance in favour of one of the Organs.

What is the mandate of Higher courts of the land madam?

Ends of JUSTICE.

Wasn’t the issue taken up by SC in wake of a PIL filed by an activist (Cleaning Ganga)? Then how is it Suo-moto?

Ganga issue was not suo-moto, but SC has taken up other matters on suo-motto in its recent history

Ganga clean up issue can be tied to Article 21. Violation of right to life under A 21 and right to clean environment inherently under A 21.

Within the same means of justice add to it- the separation of powers; wondering if we do really need the higher courts of the country to step in and held the executive accountable.

Because to me, that's eating into the time of the judiciary, when crores of cases are already being piled over.

Criminal charges and speedy remedial is equally (if not more) important than ensuring social justice in the form of tracking executives.

Suo-moto power of a court is inherent. Don’t link it with the time of the Judiciary. When anybody can file a case for another on a PIL, why can’t the Court take cognizance itself for the benefit of the larger number of poor people who cannot and do not have means to approach the Court.

The time of judiciary cannot be said to be wasted.

Yes I agree there is a lot of pendency in the Judiciary, but that should in no way hinder the process of rendering justice.

Although courts have the power, isn’t improper to take suo-moto action?

Suo-moto is a means of judicial activism by the Courts.

Ma'am, are suo moto n PIL restricted only to SC and HC.. or lower courts also having that?

Judicial Activism is not limited to the higher Judiciary but we do not see Lower Judiciary indulging in Judicial Activism

How are Statutory right protect?

Statutory rights like right to information and right to work under mnrega, for constitutional right violations one can approach The SC. But what about these statutory rights, how are they protected?

Recourse to SC under 32 is only for violation of Fundamental rights, but to HC under 226 is wider in scope as HC approached for violation of any right.

Also the particular statute can be invoked for any rights violation under the Act.

Comparison of Indian And Developed Countries principle of Tort Law

It is said that Indian tort law is fairly new. It does not give as much freedom as developed country's tort laws. Eg USA.

Are all the tort laws based on the common principle of seeking remedy

Although this is a legal or a lawyerly issue, we can discuss the construct of the issue. as it involves international understanding to some extent.

Laws are born out of cultural and historical experiences of every country.

We cannot import laws made in one country to another without modification

Social issues, historical experiences, cultural context, economic status, religious background and so many other things go into making of a law.

While the general definition of TORT law would be to provide succour to the afflicted, it works differently in different countries.

Now a days you get luke warm coffee in Starbucks because a women driver spilled hot coffee on her lap while she was holding it between her thighs when she was driviing a car!

The pharmaceutical advertisements in the US nearly discourage you from taking the medicines as theyy list out all the sideeffects including death, basically because they want to bring the fine print in front to avoid compensation claims

Surgeon General insists on gory photos and statutory warnings, not only to protect the population, but also the companies!

LGBT issues get prominence in some countries, while in some it is still not accepted.

So, coming back to the question, I believe law is an evolving creature, made for the good of the public and hopefully will be used so by the public for benefit rather than to misuse it.

We cannot actually compare laws of one country with another

So, the laws are differently made, understood and implemented in each country?

Sir, considering the points mentioned... do we think patent law will be successful in India?

On Patents, I have an ambivalent view. Again I am not a lawyer, you see!

I am not sure whether it is good or bad in its entirety. It is like examination, both needed as well as a devil.

While it encourages innovation, R&D, by providing incentives to the innovator.

It also proves to be a dampener of human rights when it can be made universally available.

So a balance is required on patents, particularly for developing and poor countries.