IANS LIVE-‘NO JUDICIAL OVERREACH’: EX-SC JUDGE SAYS PARLIAMENT IS SUPREME, CAN AMEND PROVISIONS IN CASE OF DISAGREEMENT
May 8, 2025
Fixtures
Result7 May 2025
Match 57
KKR
KKR
179/6 (20 ov)
CSK
CSK
183/8 (19.4 ov)
CSK won by 2 wickets
Result6 May 2025
Match 56
MI
MI
155/8 (20 ov)
GT
GT
147/7 (19 ov)
GT won by 3 wickets (DLS method)
Result5 May 2025
Match 55
SRH
SRH
0/0 ( ov)
DC
DC
133/7 (20 ov)
No Result
Result4 May 2025
Match 54
PBKS
PBKS
236/5 (20 ov)
LSG
LSG
199/7 (20 ov)
PBKS won by 37 runs
Result4 May 2025
Match 53
KKR
KKR
206/4 (20 ov)
RR
RR
205/8 (20 ov)
KKR won by 1 run
Result3 May 2025
Match 52
RCB
RCB
213/5 (20 ov)
CSK
CSK
211/5 (20 ov)
RCB won by 2 runs
Result2 May 2025
Match 51
GT
GT
224/6 (20 ov)
SRH
SRH
186/6 (20 ov)
GT won by 38 runs
Result1 May 2025
Match 50
RR
RR
117/10 (16.1 ov)
MI
MI
217/2 (20 ov)
MI won by 100 runs
Result30 April 2025
Match49
CSK
CSK
190/10 (19.2 ov)
PBKS
PBKS
194/6 (19.4 ov)
PBKS won by 4 wickets
Result29 April 2025
Match 48
DC
DC
190/9 (20 ov)
KKR
KKR
204/9 (20 ov)
KKR won by 14 runs
Result28 April 2025
Match 47
RR
RR
212/2 (15.5 ov)
GT
GT
209/4 (20 ov)
RR won by 8 wickets
Result27 April 2025
Match 46
DC
DC
162/8 (20 ov)
RCB
RCB
165/4 (18.3 ov)
RCB won by 6 wickets
Result27 April 2025
Match 45
MI
MI
215/7 (20 ov)
LSG
LSG
161/10 (20 ov)
MI won by 54 runs
Result26 April 2025
Match 44
KKR
KKR
7/0 (1 ov)
PBKS
PBKS
201/4 (20 ov)
No result
Result25 April 2025
Match 43
CSK
CSK
154/10 (19.5 ov)
SRH
SRH
155/5 (18.4 ov)
SRH won by 5 wickets
Result24 April 2025
Match 42
RCB
RCB
205/5 (20 ov)
RR
RR
194/9 (20 ov)
RCB won by 11 runs
Result23 April 2025
Match 41
SRH
SRH
143/8 (20 ov)
MI
MI
146/3 (15.4 ov)
MI won by 7 wickets
Result22 April 2025
Match 40
LSG
LSG
159/6 (20 ov)
DC
DC
161/2 (17.5 ov)
DC won by 8 wickets
Result21 April 2025
Match 39
KKR
KKR
159/8 (20 ov)
GT
GT
198/3 (20 ov)
GT won by 39 runs
Result20 April 2025
Match 38
MI
MI
177/1 (15.4 ov)
CSK
CSK
176/5 (20 ov)
MI won by 9 wickets

‘No judicial overreach’: Ex-SC judge says Parliament is supreme, can amend provisions in case of disagreement

‘No judicial overreach’: Ex-SC judge says Parliament is supreme, can amend provisions in case of disagreement

New Delhi, April 19 (IANS) Amid the debate over Supreme Court’s recent observations bringing President actions under judicial review and its criticism by Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar, apex court’s former judge Ajay Rastogi on Saturday dismissed the talk of ‘judicial overreach’ and reiterated the Parliament’s supreme power to amend provisions in the event of disagreement with the court’s views.

Talking to IANS, Justice Rastogi dismissed the narrative of the judiciary and the executive being on collision course, underscoring judges’ commitment to public welfare and their ability to withstand the perceived pressure due to dissection of their views.

“There is absolutely no pressure on judges. They function independently and fearlessly, no matter what the public thinks. We as judges work, with full commitment, in the interest of our institution and the public,” said Justice Rastogi, at a time when the Opposition and the ruling BJP have crossed swords over propriety in connection with the SC’s observations and its criticism.

Justice Rastogi also highlighted that the question of SC’s recent observations setting a ‘wrong precedent’ did not arise, and the top court has the option of taking a final call on issues.

“I don’t believe that it’s a matter of judicial overreach… or setting a wrong precedent. Each case has its own intricacies, and the court is always mindful of the fact as to which case deserves an interim order and which doesn’t,” he said.

Earlier this month, the top court, using its inherent powers under Article 142 of the Constitution, resolved a standoff between the Tamil Nadu government and Governor R.N. Ravi over the delay in granting assent to bills.

The apex court also termed the Governor's conduct a violation of the Constitution and specifically of Article 200.

In the process, the apex court, apparently, brought Presidential actions under judicial review by favouring a three-month deadline for granting assent to bills.

The controversy took a new twist after Rajya Sabha Chairman and Vice-President Jagdeep Dhankhar used strong words against the judiciary, comparing Article 142 to a “nuclear missile” available to the judiciary against democratic forces.

Former Union Minister Kapil Sibal called Dhankhar’s criticism an attack on the judiciary and a potential act of shaking public faith in courts.