Former Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Aman Lekhi has emphasized that while the government holds the power to frame laws, those laws are not immune from judicial review.
Addressing the media on Friday, Lekhi underlined the importance of the judiciary maintaining its independence and not aligning too closely with the executive.
“The judiciary can’t be a wing of the government… The judiciary is not supposed to oppose the government for the sake of opposing, but the judiciary can’t always be seen as being on the same side as the government, because the government is a litigant in the judiciary,” Lekhi stated.
He added that while scrutiny of any institution, including the judiciary, is valid and necessary, such criticism must be both rational and justified. “I am not saying that any system should be averse to scrutiny, but the criticism should be warranted, and the scrutiny should be sensible,” he noted.
Criticism Of Article 142: Remarks By Vice President Dhankhar
Lekhi also responded to recent comments by Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar, who had referred to Article 142 of the Constitution as a “nuclear missile” against democratic forces. The remark, according to Lekhi, was an overstatement.
“His comment leans towards excess and amounts more or less to hyperbole, which people in constitutional positions should be wary of indulging in,” Lekhi cautioned. He stressed that public figures should exercise restraint when speaking on sensitive constitutional matters. “By stirring emotions, you take the mind away from the legality and create a misconception about the whole controversy, which can have long-term consequences because it can create a view that discredits the system,” he explained.
Judicial Authority Is Unquestionable: Lekhi
Lekhi reaffirmed that the domain of legality firmly rests with the judiciary and that this jurisdiction is “undisputed and undeniable.” He reiterated the need to preserve the balance of power among constitutional institutions.
His remarks come in response to Vice President Dhankhar’s speech at the Valedictory Function of the 6th Rajya Sabha Internship Programme. There, Dhankhar argued against a scenario where the judiciary could issue directions to the President and proposed a relook at Article 145(3), which outlines the minimum bench strength required to hear constitutional cases.
The recent exchange highlights the ongoing debate over the separation of powers and the scope of judicial authority in India’s constitutional framework.
Read More: Supreme Court, Delhi High Court, States High Court, International
