SC gives directives to judges on economic matters

In a significant judgment the Supreme Court asked judges to be activists in defending the fundamental rights and civil liberties of citizens, but practice greater restraint while dealing with economic statute.

The Bench comprising justice H K Sema and Markandey Katzu said the judiciary must keep itself away from the executive and legislature’s economic decisions and give greater autonomy to the laws on fiscal and tax measures.

The judgment came in the backdrop of appeal from the Andhra Pradesh government against a judgment of the state High Court, which declared an amendment introduced in the Indian Stamp Act relating to the deposit of stamp duty as unconstitutional.

The Bench observed enhancement of stamp duty was an economic measure aimed at plugging ambiguity and securing speedy realisation of stamp duty.

It said, “The court has no expertise in these matters, and in this age of specialisation when policies have to be laid down with great care after consulting the specialists in the field, it will be wholly unwise for the court to encroach into the domain of the executive or legislative field and try to enforce its own views and perceptions.”

The Bench said the Constitution has separating the powers among the three organs of the state- the legislature, the executive and the judiciary-which must respect each other and not ordinarily encroach into each other’s domain.

Instead of interfering into economic affairs of the state, the court should uphold the civil rights and liberties of the citizens against executive or legislative invasion. The court cannot sit calm in this situation, but be the champion of the fundamental rights and civil liberties of citizens enshrined in the constitution.

“The court must always remember that invalidating a statute is a grave step, and must therefore be taken in very rare and exceptional circumstances. While the court has power to declare a statute to be unconstitutional, it should exercise great judicial restraint in this connection,” maintained justice Katzu while writing the judgment.

The Bench strictly said, “the court can declare a statute to be unconstitutional only when there can be no manner of doubt that it is flagrantly unconstitutional, and there is no way of avoiding such decision.”

The Court later added that the role of judiciary comes only when any law passed by the legislature affected the civil liberties and fundamental rights of the citizens.

The Supreme Court sustained the amendment carved out by the Andhra Pradesh government in the Indian Stamp Duty Act to restrain the practice of under valuation of the real value of the properties in the sale deeds and deceiving the government in the payment of proper revenue charges. Earlier the amendment made in the Section 47A of the Act was declared illegal by the Andhra Pradesh High Court.

Ointment to legislature

Recent criticism of judicial activism encroaching on the powers of the legislature and the executive has been expressed by many legislatures comprising Lok Sabha Speaker Somnath Chatterjee.

The Supreme Court observation on Tuesday advising judges to practice restrain while dealing out economic statute and champion the cause of citizen’s fundamental rights and civil liberties must put an ointment to Somnath Chatterjee.