"What else did Dhankhar say about the judiciary about the judiciary? - Vice -President Dhankhar Slams Supreme Court Article 142 as nuclear missile against democracy

Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar strongly criticized the Supreme Court for the abuse of Article 142 and weakening the powers of the executive. He questioned the House of Justice Verma who did not have a fir in the cash case and delayed the investigation. Dhankhar expressed concern about the arbitrary interpretation and a lack of liability of the Constitution, which describes the judiciary as ‘Super Parliament’. Neelu Ranjan, Jagran. New -delhi. Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar made a deep objection to the increasing tendency of the Supreme Court judges to weaken the powers of the executive by declaring the articles of the Constitution at random. Article 142 of the Constitution described a nuclear missile against democratic powers in the country, which the judiciary can use at any time and night. What did the Vice President say about the cash received by Justice Verma? Jagdeep Dhankhar made proof of the judges above the law because he did not register the fir in the case of the Notes of Justice Verma’s home. He said that the case was detained seven days after the fire incident seven days. When the media came up, an attempt was made to show transparency by releasing photos and videos of the burnt notes. But the investigation could not begin. Dhankhar, who questions the rights of the three -member committee for investigation by the Chief Justice of India, said what the committee has the right to investigate. This committee is not legal. The committee can only recommend. The right to investigate is only for the executive and the process begins with the fir. But the executive cannot do that, as the judges assured themselves. “Supreme Court cannot certainly” while addressing a program by Rajya Sabha pupils, Jagdeep Dhankhar made it clear that the Supreme Court could not determine a time limit for the president. Focusing on the dignity of the highest position of the president, he said that the judiciary by a deadline for the president in a recent ruling by the Supreme Court crosses the boundaries of exceeding the jurisdiction of both the executive and the legislature. He made it clear that the time limit for the president could not be linked to the president by mentioning Article 143. He said it was another matter to submit a review of this decision. He said he described the jurisdiction for the institution of the deadline for the president, and he said that only judges would establish laws and also work as executive officer. He said it would make the judiciary a superparliament to which no law of the country would apply. If he gives an example of work such as a super -parliament and was not liable at all, he said that the candidate should declare property in every election of the meeting, the candidate, but these compulsory does not apply to the judges. After independence, Jagdeep Dhankhar also objected to the erosion of democratic values ​​in the judiciary and the tendency of the actual patron of the Constitution. According to Dhankhar, the Constitution Bank of five judges has the right to declare the Constitution. But when this arrangement was made, there were only eight judges. Now it is 30. Five out of eight mean that interpretation will be per majority. But currently the Constitution is explained with the small minority of five out of 30. The Supreme Court has remained a stupid spectator: According to Jagdeep Dhankhar Dhankhar, Judge Keshavanand Bharti explains the original structure of the Constitution in 1973 and calls himself the right patron of the Constitution. But after declaring the state of emergency for two years, the basic rights provided by the Constitution were taken away and the Supreme Court remained a dumb spectator. Dhankhar described the cancellation of the law to draft a laws to form a unanimously accepted National Judgment Commission adopted by the two houses of Parliament and the right to appoint judges by the Collegian system to the spirit of the Constitution. He cited the debate in the Constitutional Assembly on the appointment of judges and the statement of Baby Saheb Bhimrao Ambedkar in it, saying that in section 124 only the Chief Justice was held in consultation. But by arbitrary interpretation, counseling was converted into consent. He surprised the Supreme Court and had a quick response and automatic knowledge of the jurisdiction of corruption raises against the Supreme Court judges by the Lokpal. He said that other democratic countries did not talk about the automatic knowledge of the judiciary. According to him, the independence of the judiciary cannot be an impenetrable armor against investigation and investigation into a case. Why not fire yet. Also read: How will war be fought in the future? This plan makes the Indian army to deal with the challenges, every latest news and accurate information of the country and the world, every moment on your phone! Download now- Jagran app