The Supreme Court of India addressed a significant inquiry involving 14 questions posed by President Droupadi Murmu regarding the powers of Governors and the President in relation to State Bills. This analysis was led by a five-judge bench, including Chief Justice B.R. Gavai and Justices Surya Kant, Vikram Nath, P.S. Narasimha, and A.S. Chandurkar. The opinion was released on November 20, 2025, and spans 111 pages.
Key Constitutional Insights
The Bench clarified the relationship between the Governor, President, and the legislative process governed by Articles 200 and 201 of the Indian Constitution.
Governor’s Options Under Article 200
- The Governor can either assent to a bill, reserve it for the President, or withhold assent and return it with comments.
- The third option, to withhold assent, is only applicable if the bill is not a Money Bill.
Discretion of the Governor
The court affirmed that the Governor is not obligated to follow the advice of the Council of Ministers when exercising options under Article 200. The Governor’s discretion in this matter remains absolute.
Judicial Review Limitations
- The Supreme Court stated that the discharge of the Governor’s duties under Article 200 is typically not subject to judicial review.
- However, in cases of prolonged inaction, the court may direct the Governor to act within a reasonable timeframe.
Presidential Powers Under Article 201
The Supreme Court also commented on the President’s powers under Article 201. Similar to the Governor, the President’s decisions are also shielded from judicial scrutiny.
Judicial Limitations on Timelines
- Both the Governor and President cannot be bound by judicially imposed timelines in executing their functions under Articles 200 and 201.
- The court emphasized that constitutional discretion cannot be forced into a timeline framework.
Constitutional Immunity
Article 361 provides immunity to the Governor, preventing personal judicial proceedings. However, this does not prevent limited judicial review concerning constitutional functions.
Questions Answered by the Supreme Court
| Question Number | Summary |
|---|---|
| 1 | Options available to the Governor for a Bill under Article 200. |
| 2 | Discretion of the Governor in decision-making. |
| 3 | Justiciability of the Governor’s actions. |
| 4 | Judicial review limitations under Article 361. |
| 5 | Imposition of timelines for the Governor’s powers. |
| 6 | Justiciability of the President’s assent under Article 201. |
| 7 | Timelines imposed on the President’s discretion. |
| 8 | Requirement for the President to seek Supreme Court advice. |
| 9 | Justiciability of decisions before a Bill becomes law. |
| 10 | Substitution of constitutional powers under Article 142. |
| 11 | Law status without Governor assent. |
| 12 | Importance of referring constitutional questions to a five-judge bench. |
| 13 | Scope of Supreme Court powers under Article 142. |
| 14 | Supreme Court jurisdiction between Union and State Governments. |
This comprehensive judicial opinion sheds light on the significant constitutional roles of both the Governor and the President, establishing important precedents for the interpretation of legislative powers in India.
