When every bill needs a bail, why parliament cannot breathe freely
In a healthy democracy, the Parliament is the voice of the people. Elected representatives come together to debate, pass laws and shape the future of the nation. But in India today, a disturbing pattern is emerging laws passed by Parliament and signed by the President are frequently being challenged, halted or overturned by the Supreme Court. This raises a serious question – If every bill needs a “bail” from the judiciary before implementation, Is Parliament truly free to function or has it become a prisoner of constant judicial scrutiny?
The Supreme Court’s Growing Intervention –
While the Constitution of India gives the Supreme Court the authority to review laws and ensure they conform to constitutional provisions, this power must be exercised with great restraint. The intention of judicial review is to protect the rights of citizens not to undermine the authority of the legislature. However, the recent pattern suggests something else.
It has become common for the Opposition to rush to the Supreme Court the moment a new bill becomes law. From the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) and National Register of Citizens (NRC) to the Farm Bills, the courts have entertained Public Interest Litigations (PILs) even at midnight.
While the court has shown extraordinary urgency in such political matters, it is far less responsive when common citizens seek urgent justice in criminal or civil cases. Midnight hearings are rare for the average person, yet they have become routine when politics is involved.
This inconsistency has shaken public faith. The judiciary, which should be neutral and focused on the rule of law, often appears to give special treatment to high-profile political cases.
A System Where Judges Appoint Judges –
One of the root causes behind the current situation lies in the judicial appointment process itself. India follows the collegium system, where judges appoint other judges. There is no involvement of the President or the central government in this process.
This system lacks transparency and accountability. The executive branch has no voice in selecting those who interpret the Constitution. Can a democracy truly be balanced if one branch of government has unchecked powers over itself?
In a democracy, no institution should have absolute autonomy not even the judiciary.
Waqf Bill and Unequal Standards –
A recent example of judicial overreach is seen in the Waqf Bill. The Supreme Court raised objections to two major aspects –
• The inclusion of non-Muslim members in the Waqf Board.
• The proposal to allow “Waqf by user” properties to remain notified.
The court proposed that properties declared as Waqf, even based on continuous use, cannot be de-notified. This essentially protects lands claimed through user-based practices, a move that may impact property rights across several communities.
Yet, when it comes to Hindu religious property management, similar urgency and protection are missing. No concern is shown for Hindu demands like the formation of a Sanatan Board to manage temple properties or religious trusts. Why this selective concern? If one community’s cultural rights deserve judicial protection, should not the same be applied equally?
Bills Passed with Majority Still Face Legal Blockade –
Let’s not forget how the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) and the National Register of Citizens (NRC) were introduced, debated, passed by Parliament and signed by the President. Still, they have been put on hold due to continuous judicial interventions.
The same happened with the Farm Bills, which were also passed with a clear majority. But instead of allowing them to be implemented and evaluated based on real-world impact, the laws were stalled under pressure from protests and judicial proceedings.
These repeated halts are not just legal delays they are setbacks to India’s development and governance process.
When elected lawmakers pass a bill and the President approves it, that law should be respected unless it is proven unconstitutional. But every law now walks into a courtroom before it walks into society. This is not how a healthy democracy functions.
Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar’s Strong Stand –
Even the Vice President of India, Jagdeep Dhankhar, recently criticized the Supreme Court for overstepping its boundaries. In a landmark judgment related to Tamil Nadu, the Supreme Court directed the President to act within deadlines while dealing with state assembly bills.
Vice President Dhankhar called it a clear case of judicial overreach. He argued that the judiciary has no authority to direct the President of India, who is the constitutional head of the nation. He warned that such rulings disturb the delicate balance of power between the judiciary, executive and legislature.
His remarks are not isolated. A growing number of legal experts, political leaders and scholars are raising concerns about how the judiciary is increasingly acting like a “super government.”
The Need for Judicial Reforms –
India’s judiciary still functions under many laws created during British rule. Times have changed. The country has grown, society has evolved and so must our legal framework.
Another major reason behind this clash between Parliament and the judiciary is that many Indian laws are outdated. A significant portion of our legal framework still dates back to the British colonial period when laws were made to rule over Indians, not to empower them.
To move forward, India needs comprehensive legal reforms. Laws must reflect the current realities of society, technology, economy and democracy.
Judicial Accountability and the Way Forward –
No democracy can be successful without accountability. Just as we demand transparency from politicians and bureaucrats, judges too must be accountable. They must declare reasons for urgent hearings, explain inconsistencies in decisions and be open to scrutiny.
We need – A transparent and reformed judicial appointment system, Judicial Conduct Code with public oversight, Time-bound verdicts and reduced pendency, Equal urgency for both political and common man’s issues and Amendments in outdated British laws.
Most importantly, Parliament must reclaim its authority as the primary law-making institution. The judiciary must assist, not obstruct, in the democratic process.
Let Parliament Breathe –
The Indian judiciary is a pillar of democracy, but it cannot become a ceiling that stops Parliament from standing tall. Every law does not need a “bail” before it can be implemented. Judicial review must exist but with restraint, fairness and accountability.
Yes, the courts play a crucial role in upholding the Constitution. But that role should not evolve into direct interference in the law-making process or micromanaging elected governments.
The time has come to initiate serious judicial reforms, amend colonial-era laws and restore faith in the democratic process. Only then can India walk confidently into the future with balance, trust, and unity.
Note – This is personal points of view of writer.