On Friday, the Supreme Court of India agreed to delve into the provisions of Article 361 of the Indian Constitution, which provides “blanket immunity” to governors from any form of criminal prosecution. The bench, led by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, issued a notice to the West Bengal government concerning a plea filed by a contractual woman employee. The apex court asked the woman employee of West Bengal ‘Raj Bhavan’ to make the Centre a party to her plea as well.
The woman alleged that she was molested by the state Governor CV Ananda Bose and is seeking judicial scrutiny of Article 361 which grants immunity to the governor. Article 361 is an exception to Article 14 (right to equality) of the Constitution and provides that the president or the governor is not answerable to any court for the exercise of the powers and duties of his office.
The Supreme Court also called upon Attorney General R Venkataramani to assist in the case.
Understanding Article 361
Article 361 of the Indian Constitution grants immunity to the president and the governors of states from legal action while they are in office. This provision ensures that neither the president nor a Governor is answerable to any court for the exercise and performance of their official powers and duties, nor for any acts done or purported to be done in the course of these duties. During their term, they are shielded from both criminal and civil proceedings. Specifically, criminal proceedings cannot be instituted or continued against them, nor can any arrest or imprisonment processes be issued by a court. For civil proceedings in their personal capacity, a two-month notice is required before initiating any action detailing the nature of the proceedings, the cause of action and the specifics of the party instituting the proceedings.
Discretionary constitutional powers of governors
Governors in India also possess discretionary constitutional powers, which are defined by the Constitution and can be exercised as deemed appropriate in specific situations. These discretionary powers allow governors to make crucial decisions in the executive realm, often in times of political or administrative uncertainty. While these powers are constitutionally granted, they remain subject to judicial review to ensure they are exercised within the bounds of legality and propriety.
Primary role of governors
The primary responsibility of a governor in India is to uphold, safeguard and enforce the Constitution and the laws of the land. As outlined in Articles 153 and 154 of the Constitution of India, governors are responsible for ensuring the smooth functioning of the state government while upholding the constitutional framework.
Historical context and precedents
The Supreme Court’s exploration of Article 361 is significant in light of past judicial precedents that have shaped the understanding of gubernatorial immunity. In the landmark case of Rameshwar Prasad v. Union of India, the Court elaborated on the immunities granted to the governor, affirming that even allegations of personal malafides do not diminish this immunity. The ruling established that the governor is fully shielded under Article 361 not only from criminal complaints but also from actions related to the discretionary powers exercised in their constitutional role.
Another pertinent case was in 2017 when the Supreme Court allowed fresh criminal charges of conspiracy against several leaders involved in the 1992 demolition of the Babri Masjid. However, the trial for Kalyan Singh, the then-governor of Rajasthan, was deferred, underscoring the court’s adherence to the principle that criminal proceedings against a sitting governor are suspended until the completion of their term.
The Supreme Court’s forthcoming examination of Article 361 may have significant implications for the scope of gubernatorial immunity and could potentially reshape the legal landscape concerning the accountability of high constitutional officeholders.
Link to article –
What is Article 361? Why SC seeks to review immunity for governors?
