Stability of Indian Constitution

The Supreme Court of India emphasized the stability and significance of the Indian Constitution, especially in contrast to political turmoil in neighboring countries like Nepal and Bangladesh. Chief Justice B R Gavai highlighted pride in the Constitution amidst instability in neighboring states.

Supreme Court Discussion

The discussion occurred during a hearing by a five-judge Constitution bench, including Justices Surya Kant, Vikram Nath, P S Narasimha, and A S Chandurkar. The bench addressed the need for timelines for President and Governors to act on state legislature bills.

Empirical Data Debate

• Solicitor General Tushar Mehta agreed with the CJI's comments and attempted to present historical data on bill approvals.
• Mehta claimed that over the past 55 years, only 20 bills had been withheld, with 90% receiving assent within a month.
• Senior Advocate A M Singhvi and Advocate Kapil Sibal opposed Mehta's reliance on empirical data, noting previous objections to their data presentations.

Judicial Response

• The bench insisted on fairness, requiring all parties to have equal opportunities to present data if allowed.
• Justice Vikram Nath argued the continuation of the Constitution and democracy for 75 years, regardless of bill approval statistics.
• Justice Nath and CJI Gavai both reiterated pride in the Constitution amid regional instability.