The constituent power can exercise judicial power but it has to apply law. In the jurisdiction of the House in the trial of controverted elections was transferred by statute to the courts of law.
Authorisation means acceptance of the responsibility. The issue pressed by the respondent was that the appellant and her election agent Yashpal Kapur incurred or authorised expenditure in excess of the amount prescribed by Section 77 of the Act read with Rule Beforecontroverted elections were tried by the whole House of Commons as party questions.
The powers, privileges and immunities of Parliament and its members as provided in Article are that they shall be such as may be defined by Parliament by law, and, until so, defined, shall be those of the House of Commons of the Parliament of the United Kingdom.
A constitutional provisions authorising the Legislature to provide for the mode of contesting elections in all cases not otherwise specifically provided for in the Constitution itself confers on the Legislature adequate authority to provide for all election contests and to determine where and by what means election contests shall be conducted.
The results started coming in by 10 March and early returns showed that the Congress was heading for a landslide victory, even beyond the most optimistic estimates of the Congress supporters. The Lord Chancellor had offered them a writ of privilege but they refused it. The appellant was not asked a single question.
Provision is also made for the trial of a special case. Sri Raj Narain, respondent No.
It was held that the Court had no power to restrain the executive officer of the House from carrying out the order of the House.
The fourth clause which directly concerns the present appeals states that no law made by Parliament before the commencement of the Constitution Thirty-ninth Amendment Act,in so far as it relates to election petitions and matters connected therewith, shall apply or shall be deemed ever to have applied to or in relation to the election of any such person as is referred to in clause 1 to either House of Parliament and such election shall not be deemed to be void or ever to have become void on any ground on which such election could be declared to be void under any such law and notwithstanding any order made by any court, before such commencement, declaring such election to be void, such election shall continue to be valid in all respects and any such order and any finding on which such order is based shall be and shall be deemed always to have been void and of no effect.
It is a Political question in the United States. Suffice it to note that the power of the court must rise to the occasion, if justice, in its larger connotation, is the goal-and it is.
In any legislation relating to the validity of elections the concept of free and fair elections is an important consideration. The detention of a Member under Regulation B of the Defence General Regulationsmade under the Emergency Powers Defencc Acts, andled to the Committee of Privileges being directed to consider whether such detention constituted a breach of the privileges of the House; the Committee reported that there was no breach of privilege involved.
It is not possible to hold that the concept of free and fair election is a basic structure, a The amending body has excluded judicial review in Articles 31A, 31B and 31C. The detention of members of Parliament is by a statutory authority in the exercise of his statutory powers.Indira Nehru Gandhi vs Shri Raj Narain [ALL SC NOVEMBER] Doctrine of separation of powers- The constituent power is independent of the doctrine of separation of powers.
The constituent power is sovereign. The doctrine of separation of powers as recognised.
Indira Gandhi vs. Raj Narain was a landmark case. Indira Gandhi after being found guilty of using corrupt practices for election by the Allahabad High Court, ma.
Raj Narain (Supp.) SCC 1 Introduction- The very famous case of Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain which became one of the landmark cases in the history of India involved a.
Indira Nehru Gandhi v. Raj Narain: Case Analysis. Indira Nehru Gandhi v. Raj Narain: Case Analysis. May 1, LexQuest Articles.
By Pooja Meena, National Law University, Jodhpur. EQUIVALENT CITATION – AIR SC Whether or not, the election of Indira Gandhi was void?
Prashant Bhushan takes a close look at the landmark Indira Gandhi vs Raj Narain case in his new book, published by Penguin India: The Case That Shook India.
raj narain 1 air sc indira gandhi vs. mrs. According to me this jurisdiction of Supreme Court is essential for protection of basic features of the constitution.
With the intention of preserving the original ideals envisioned by the constitutionmakers.3/5(2).Download