Article 142 of the Constitution of India

Article 142 of the Constitution of India is a unique provision that grants extraordinary powers to the Supreme Court to ensure “complete justice” in any matter before it. This article stands as a constitutional safeguard, allowing the highest court of the land to go beyond procedural or statutory limitations when necessary to uphold fairness, equity, and justice.

The provision is found in Part V – Chapter IV (The Union Judiciary) and reads as follows:

Article 142 – Enforcement of decrees and orders of the Supreme Court and orders as to discovery, etc.

The Supreme Court in the exercise of its jurisdiction may pass such decree or make such order as is necessary for doing complete justice in any cause or matter pending before it. Any decree so passed or orders so made shall be enforceable throughout the territory of India in such manner as may be prescribed by or under any law made by Parliament, and, until provision in that behalf is so made, in such manner as the President may by order prescribe.

Subject to the provisions of any law made in this behalf by Parliament, the Supreme Court shall, as respects the whole of the territory of India, have all and every power to make any order to secure the attendance of any person, the discovery or production of any documents, or the investigation or punishment of any contempt of itself.

Key Features of Article 142

1. Wide Discretionary Power – The Supreme Court can pass any order necessary to ensure complete justice, unrestricted by procedural limitations.
2. Binding Across India – Any decree or order passed under Article 142 is enforceable throughout the country.
3. Presidential Role in Enforcement – Until Parliament legislates on enforcement mechanisms, the President can prescribe the mode of execution.
4. Contempt Jurisdiction – Article 142(2) also reinforces the Supreme Court’s power to deal with contempt of itself.

Nature and Scope

• Extraordinary Power – It is an exceptional authority, meant to be exercised sparingly and in extraordinary situations where existing legal provisions are inadequate to do justice.
• Supplementary, Not Substitutive – Article 142 supplements existing laws but does not replace or override substantive law except in rare circumstances where no law exists or the law fails to meet the ends of justice.
• Equitable Jurisdiction – The provision allows the court to look beyond the letter of the law and focus on the spirit of justice.

Limitations on Article 142

While the language of Article 142 is broad, judicial interpretation has clarified certain limitations:

1. Cannot Contravene Fundamental Rights – Orders under Article 142 cannot violate the basic structure of the Constitution or fundamental rights.
2. Subordinate to Statutory Provisions in General – Normally, the Court should not use Article 142 to directly contravene existing substantive laws, though it may fill gaps where the law is silent.
3. Self-Imposed Restraint – The Supreme Court itself has emphasised that this extraordinary power should be exercised cautiously.

Judicial Interpretation and Landmark Cases

1. Prem Chand Garg v. Excise Commissioner, U.P. (1963): The Court clarified that while Article 142 provides broad powers, it cannot be used to pass orders inconsistent with fundamental rights.
2. Union Carbide Corporation v. Union of India (1991) – Bhopal Gas Tragedy Case: The Supreme Court invoked Article 142 to approve a settlement of $470 million for victims, emphasising that the provision can be used to craft solutions beyond the scope of existing statutory remedies.
3. Supreme Court Bar Association v. Union of India (1998): The Court held that Article 142 does not allow it to disregard substantive law or statutory provisions, but can be used to supplement them to achieve complete justice.
4. A.R. Antulay v. R.S. Nayak (1988): The Court admitted that its earlier order transferring a criminal trial under Article 142 was erroneous and could not override statutory provisions related to criminal procedure.
5. Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan (1997): In the absence of legislation on sexual harassment at the workplace, the Court used Article 142 to lay down binding guidelines, which remained in force until Parliament enacted the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013.
6. Union of India v. State of Gujarat (2019) – Godhra Train Burning Case: The Court used Article 142 to grant compensation and rehabilitation measures to victims, ensuring closure where legal processes were protracted.

Practical Applications

• Settling complex disputes where statutory law provides no straightforward remedy.
• Crafting guidelines in areas lacking legislation.
• Approving out-of-court settlements in the public interest.
• Directing relief or rehabilitation measures for victims in exceptional cases.
• Ensuring compliance with its orders.

Criticism of Article 142

1. Potential for Judicial Overreach – Critics argue that excessive use may blur the separation of powers between the legislature and judiciary.
2. Lack of Clear Boundaries – The absence of strict criteria for invocation can lead to subjective interpretation.
3. Possibility of Inconsistency – Different benches may apply the provision differently, creating unpredictability.

Conclusion

Article 142 stands as a constitutional tool that empowers the Supreme Court to act as the ultimate guardian of justice. While its scope is vast, the Court’s jurisprudence reflects a balance between using this extraordinary power and respecting the supremacy of statutory law and constitutional boundaries. When exercised with restraint, Article 142 ensures that justice is not defeated by procedural technicalities, reaffirming the principle that the Constitution is a living document designed to serve the ends of justice in a dynamic society.