City
Epaper

'Unlawful, vitiated', Justice Nagarathna on demonetisation of Rs 500 & Rs 1,000 currency notes

By IANS | Updated: January 2, 2023 14:45 IST

New Delhi, Jan 2 Supreme Court judge Justice B.V. Nagarathna, who dissented with the majority view on the ...

Open in App

New Delhi, Jan 2 Supreme Court judge Justice B.V. Nagarathna, who dissented with the majority view on the Centre's 2016 demonetisation decision, said the demonetisation of the Rs 500 and Rs 1,000 currency notes was unlawful and vitiated.

Justice Nagarathna said the objective of the Central government may have been sound, but the manner in which set objectives were achieved and the procedure followed for the same, was "not in accordance with law..."

A five-judge constitution bench headed by Justice S.A. Nazeer and comprising Justices B.R. Gavai, A.S. Bopanna, V. Ramasubramanian, and B.V. Nagarathna pronounced the judgment on a clutch of petitions challenging the Centre's 2016 decision to demonetise currency notes of Rs 1,000 and Rs 500 denominations.

The top court affirmed the Centre's 2016 decision to demonetise currency notes of Rs 1,000 and Rs 500 denominations with a 4:1 majority.

In her minority judgment, Justice Nagarathna held that the demonetisation of the Rs 500 and Rs 1,000 currency notes was vitiated and unlawful.

Justice Nagarathna said: "I am of the considered view that impugned notification dated November 8, 2016...is unlawful. In the circumstances the action of demonetisation of all currency notes Rs 500 and Rs 1,000 currency notes is vitiated..."

Justice Nagarathna emphasized that she is not questioning the 'noble objectives' of the exercise itself, but only the legal viewpoint and status quo ante cannot be restored now since the action occurred in 2016.

She noted that there was no independent application of mind by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI), and the entire exercise was carried out in 24 hours and added that the power of the Central government being vast has to be exercised through a plenary legislation rather than by an executive act by issuance of notification.

"It is necessary that Parliament, which consists of the representatives of the people of the country, discusses the matter and thereafter, approves the matter," she said.

She further added that the proposal originated from the Centre while the RBI's opinion was sought and such an opinion given by the RBI cannot be construed as a recommendation under section 26(2) of the RBI Act.

Justice Nagarathna said: "Parliament is often referred to as a nation in miniature. It is the basis of democracy... Parliament, which is the centre of democracy, cannot be left aloof in a matter of such critical importance."

Disclaimer: This post has been auto-published from an agency feed without any modifications to the text and has not been reviewed by an editor

Tags: Justice s.a.Supreme CourtSeveral supreme courtSupreme court and high court levelCanadian supreme court
Open in App

Related Stories

BusinessVodafone Idea Share Price Falls as Supreme Court Postpones AGR Dues Hearing to Oct 6

BusinessVodafone Idea Share Price Falls By 6% Ahead of Supreme Court Hearing On Rs, 9450 Crore AGR Dues

NationalDelhi Metro Tragedy: Woman Falls or Jumps From Supreme Court Station; Investigation Underway

BusinessVodafone Idea Shares Rise by 1%: Telecom Stock Jumps 15% in One Month After Government Signals Support on AGR Dues

NationalSupreme Court Rejects Jacqueline Fernandez’s Plea to Dismiss Rs 215 Crore Money Laundering Charges Linked to Sukesh Chandrashekhar

Politics Realted Stories

MumbaiAmeet Satam Appointed As Mumbai BJP President Ahead of BMC Polls

Maharashtra'Chaddi Baniyan' Protest at Maharashtra Assembly: Opposition Stages Agitation Against Sena MLA for Punching and Slapping Canteen Staff (Watch Video)

MaharashtraMaharashtra Monsoon Session: Ajit Pawar Slams Bhaskar Jadhav Over Fund Allegations, Says 'No Need for Unsolicited Advice'

MumbaiUddhav Thackeray Pats Raj Thackeray on Back at Victory Rally Speech; Emotional Video of Thackeray Brothers Goes Viral

MaharashtraMarathi Language Controversy: ‘Did I Pass a GR Against Brotherhood?’ Devendra Fadnavis Hits Back at Uddhav & Raj Thackeray