#emmergency

COMMISSION OPEN!

It’s little emergency, I’m back to full time drawing to get full monthly health insurance. I need that to fix my heart malfunction (been diagnosed few months ago with ASDII) so  if you can’t order please share! I’ll be very thankfull!

Parties to the case: Petitioner: Indira Nehru Gandhi

                             Respondent: Shri Raj Narain & Anr

Nature of case: Civil

Citation: 1975 AIR 865, 1975 SCR (3) 333

Bench: H.R. Khanna, K.K. Mathew, M.H. Beg, Y.V. Chandrachud

FACTS OF THE CASE

Indira Gandhi vs. Raj Narain was the landmark case that created history and led to the imposition of Emergency in India from 1975 to 1977. It is the case which questioned the powers of the judiciary, a showcase of how Parliament expected the judiciary to kneel down before them. Parliament tried to establish its supremacy in the course of this case but put in place by the judiciary. The hearing of the case in Supreme court took place during the emergency during which the fundamental rights were suspended and press censorship was enforced, due to which there were no public hearing or possible reporting of the case. The case had a big impact on Indian politics.

In 1971, when the 5th Lok Sabha elections were held, Indira Gandhi and her party emerged victorious, securing a total of 352 seats out of 518 seats in the said elections. She fought her election from the Rae Bareilly Constituency and against her contest was Raj Narain, leader of Ram Manohar Lohia's SSP. Disappointed with the defeat, he filed an appeal to nullify the election and accused Indira Gandhi of using corrupt practices in the election campaign to claim victory. On 24th April, 1971, he challenged the Prime Minister's election by filing a petition in the Allahabad High Court and accused Gandhi of violating the election code in the Representation of the People Act, 1951. Apart from that, he alleged that Indira Gandhi has used Government vehicles for her election campaigns, distributed liquor and blankets to the voters to influence them to vote for her, exceeding the campaign expenses. The Allahabad High court declared Indira Gandhi's election void on the grounds of corrupt practices on 12th June 1975. 

ISSUES RAISED ARE

Whether Article 329A Clause (4) of the Constitution of India is Valid?

Whether Representation of People’s (Amendment) Act, 1974 And Election Laws (Amendment) Act, 1975 are Constitutionally Valid?

Whether Indira Gandhi’s Election is Valid or Void?

DECISION

The court provided its judgment on 7th November, 1975 and was the first case in which the landmark decision of Kesavananda Bharati case was applied. The apex court upheld the contention of the respondent and declared clause (4) of Article 329-A as unconstitutional. Mathew J said that Article 329-A(4) destroyed the basic structure of the constitution. He was of the view that a healthy democracy' can only function when there is possibility of free and fair elections and the impugned amendment destroyed that possibility. Chandrachud J. found that the amendment was violative of the principle of separation of powers' as it wilfully transferred a function into the hands of the legislative which was purely judicial. He was also of the view that the amendment is violative of Article 14 as it creates unequal positions of specific members of the Parliament against others. 

Ray C.J held that one more basic feature was violated by the said amendment i.e the rule of law and Justice Khanna was of the opinion of violation of norms of free and fair elections. The bench also held that the amendment was violative of the principles of natural justice i.e Audi Alteram Partem Which means listening to the other side' as it was denying the right to fair hearing of those who were challenging the election of the members mentioned in the Amendment. Hence it was on varied reasons that the 39th Amendment act, 1975 was struck down as it was unconstitutional and violative of the basic structure of the Constitution.

RATIO DECIDENDI

The ratio decidendi in Raj Narain v. Indira Gandhi (1975) is centered on the Court's assertion that judicial review and the rule of law are integral components of the Constitution’s basic structure, which cannot be undermined by legislative amendments. In this case, the Supreme Court held that the 39th Amendment, which sought to immunize the Prime Minister’s election from judicial scrutiny, was unconstitutional. This amendment violated the essential democratic principles of equality and accountability by placing certain electoral disputes beyond the reach of the judiciary.

The Court ruled that Parliament cannot use its amending power to alter or destroy the basic structure of the Constitution. This includes the principle that no one, not even the Prime Minister, is above the law, and that the judiciary must have the authority to review acts of the legislature and executive to maintain constitutional governance. By striking down the amendment, the Court underscored that the principles of democracy, accountability, and judicial review are essential to the Constitution and must be preserved.

OBITER DICTA

In the Raj Narain v. Indira Gandhi case, the Supreme Court’s obiter dicta included several reflections on the nature of democracy and the limits of political power. While the main decision focused on the validity of the 39th Amendment and its impact on the election process, the justices also commented on the importance of judicial review in maintaining the integrity of the democratic system. The judges emphasized that no individual or institution—even the Prime Minister—was above the law, and that the judiciary must be able to scrutinize and review any actions that could undermine the principles of free and fair elections. This comment underscored the Court’s role in safeguarding democracy against any form of authoritarianism, whether from the executive or the legislature.

The Court also remarked on Parliamentary supremacy and its limits. While Parliament has broad powers, the justices emphasized that those powers are not without bounds, particularly when they threaten the fundamental rights of citizens or the core principles of democracy. The justices observed that while the Constitution allows for the amendment process, amendments cannot be made in such a way that would distort the fundamental structure of the Constitution itself. This reflects the Court’s underlying concern about the vulnerability of democratic systems to manipulation or overreach by powerful political figures.

Furthermore, the justices observed that the right to contest elections is a crucial aspect of democratic participation, and no law or amendment should interfere with the fairness of electoral processes. They emphasized the importance of ensuring that the election process is transparent and accountable, free from misuse of power, to preserve the people's trust in democratic institutions.

REFLECTION

What is Cardiopulmonar

y Resuscitation

Treatment for cardiac or respiratory arrest is called cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). the goals of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR )are to open the airway, reestablish breathing, and reestablish circulation.it is best to give cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR )only if you have been trained in the procedure.

Step of Emergency treatments for CPR

1.Lay the victim flat on his back.

2.Sweep the victim’s mouth.

you are seen an object lodged with the victim’s throat, do not attempt to retrieve it, as this might force the thing farther down the airway; give emergency treatments for choking.

3.open the victim’s airway:

Gently tilt back the victim’s head and lift the chin.

4.Look, listen, and feel for breathing:

Be sure to put your ear to the victim’s mouth; chest movement alone might not mean breathings.

5.if the victim isn’t breathing, Grant to breaths:

Got notified that more family members got it so things are getting harder, go on @sinisterfilth cause I sell art commissions, from logos yo icons illustrations comics designs, anything!

Also donations are highly appreciated

telah ditemukan dompet yang berisi sim C, Sim A, E- KTP, KTM, ATM Mandiri dan BCA, STNK motor vario BG 8556 JF dan uang tunai sebesar 160ribu pemilik atas nama Wella Aprili Mahasiswi MDP..

dompet ditemukan di daerah Basuki Rahmat..

bagi yang merasa kehilangan silakan hubungi 081977784846 Riyan