Article 142 of Indian Constitution: Scope, Powers, and Significance Explained

In the intricate architecture of India’s constitutional framework, Article 142 stands apart as a provision charged with both power and controversy. It grants the Supreme Court the authority to “pass such decree or make such order as is necessary for doing complete justice in any cause or matter pending before it.” Embedded within the chapter on the Union Judiciary, Article 142 has enabled landmark judgments and shaped the course of Indian legal history, sometimes stepping beyond legislative silences to ensure equity and justice.

Seen by jurists as both a sword and a shield, the clause’s sweeping language has raised profound questions about judicial overreach, constitutional balance, and the relationship between the judiciary and other branches of government. As contemporary social, political, and legal issues reach the doors of the Supreme Court, Article 142’s scope and application continue to command national attention.

The Text and Intent of Article 142

At its essence, Article 142 is designed as a constitutional safety valve. The text states:

“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.”

This deliberately broad grant empowers the apex court to transcend procedural limitations and ensure “complete justice” — a term left undefined by the framers. The article was envisaged to equip the court with a means to fill legislative gaps, cure legal technicalities, and enforce its decrees nationwide.

Historical Background and Constituent Assembly Debates

During Constituent Assembly debates, leading figures like Dr. B.R. Ambedkar explained this provision’s intent. The drafters recognized circumstances where adherence to black-letter law might result in injustice, necessitating exceptional judicial intervention.

Yet, the debates also underscored caution. While Article 142 was intended as an extraordinary measure, it was never meant to become routine or allow the judiciary carte blanche.

“Article 142 is the Constitution’s conscious acknowledgment that the rule of law, at times, needs the corrective of judicial ingenuity to ensure justice is not stymied by mere technicality.”
— Former Chief Justice Dipak Misra

Illustrative Use of Article 142: Key Cases and Judicial Innovation

Since its inception, Article 142 has influenced both celebrated and controversial decisions. The Supreme Court has invoked it to resolve legal deadlocks, address humanitarian crises, and direct administrative action.

Ayodhya Verdict (2019)

A defining recent example is the Ayodhya land dispute verdict. After years of complex litigation, the Supreme Court, harnessing Article 142, ordered land allocations beyond the explicit relief sought, prioritizing equity and a final resolution. This intervention showcased both the utility and gravity of such expansive power.

Bhopal Gas Tragedy Compensation

In the aftermath of the 1984 Bhopal Gas Tragedy, the court utilized Article 142 to forge a unique settlement. By ordering Union Carbide to pay compensation, even before the completion of all procedural steps, the court ensured timely relief to victims. The procedural shortcuts invoked criticism, yet arguably averted years of additional distress for affected communities.

Reforming Social Practices

Article 142 has also been pivotal in social reform. From directing guidelines against sexual harassment at the workplace (Vishakha case) to dissolving marriages in irretrievable breakdown scenarios before legislative recognition, the Supreme Court has addressed pressing social gaps through this mechanism.

Article 142 in Perspective: Powers, Limits, and Critiques

Scope and Reach

Legal scholars often describe Article 142 as judicial “residual power” — to be applied where existing laws fall silent, or their strict application would defeat the very purpose of justice. This elasticity is both its strength and its risk.

Key attributes of Article 142’s power include:

• Judicial Creativity: Courts can create remedies or pass tailored orders approaching the realm of policy.
• Binding Enforcement: Any decree or order under Article 142 is enforceable nationwide.
• Supremacy over Conflicting Laws: In doing “complete justice,” courts have overridden statutory provisions, where they conflicted with the spirit of equity.

Constitutional and Institutional Checks

Despite its amplitude, Article 142’s use is not unrestrained. Over time, the Supreme Court has affirmed several guardrails:

• Not for Lawmaking: Article 142 must not substitute legislative or executive authority. It fills gaps, but prolonged or frequent use raises separation of powers concerns.
• Not in Violation of Statutory Prohibitions: Orders must not directly contradict substantive statutory provisions, barring rarest circumstances.
• Used Sparingly: Courts have repeatedly stressed Article 142 is to be used sparingly, for extraordinary situations.

“Article 142 was never intended as a tool for daily judicial administration. Its overuse risks undermining the meticulously crafted balance of the Indian Constitution.”
— Constitutional law expert, Prof. Madhav Khosla

Critics and Controversies

Critics argue that unfettered use of Article 142 may foster judicial overreach, blur lines between government branches, and erode predictability in law. Over time, the judiciary itself has responded by narrowing its own interventions, particularly in economic or policy matters, emphasizing self-restraint.

At the same time, supporters highlight that, in a complex and populous democracy, rigid application of law can rarely address the nuances of justice in every case. Article 142 thus acts as a necessary constitutional safety net.

The Evolving Role of Article 142: Recent Trends

The twenty-first century has seen both a broadening and a recalibration of Article 142’s use:

• Digital Rights and Technology: Courts have invoked the provision to bridge gaps in digital rights, information privacy, and emerging challenges where legislation lags.
• Mediation and Alternative Dispute Resolution: Article 142 has helped institutionalize court-led mediation and facilitate out-of-court settlements with legal closure.
• Environmental Justice: From pollution control to wildlife conservation, the Supreme Court has directed urgent, nationwide action via Article 142, often in coordination with government agencies.

Increasingly, however, the court demonstrates mindfulness of its constitutional boundaries. There is a noticeable preference for coordination with the legislature and executive, and an openness to solicit amicus input, public consultations, and expert committees.

Article 142 and the Road Ahead

Looking forward, Article 142 will remain both vital and debated. As new social dynamics, technologies, and disputes test the limits of statutory law, the Supreme Court’s ability to do “complete justice” will be weighed alongside democratic checks and oversight.

Legal reforms have occasionally pondered clearer legislative frameworks for remedying identifiable procedural lacunae—potentially lessening reliance on Article 142. Yet, its significance as a testament to the flexibility and dynamism of India’s constitution is unlikely to wane.

Conclusion: Article 142 as the Guardian of “Complete Justice”

Article 142 of the Indian Constitution stands as a powerful testament to the judicial mandate of achieving justice over mere legal formality. Its application across decades illustrates the creative and adaptive power of constitutional courts. While concerns over separation of powers and judicial overreach are legitimate, history shows that, used judiciously, Article 142 can enable the Supreme Court to remain a bulwark against injustice.

The future of Article 142 will depend on the court’s continued commitment to constitutional limits—balancing the urgency of immediate justice with the prudence of institutional restraint. As India’s legal challenges grow in complexity, Article 142 will remain a critical—if delicately balanced—tool in the Court’s arsenal.

---

FAQs

What is Article 142 of the Indian Constitution?

Article 142 empowers the Supreme Court of India to pass any order necessary to deliver complete justice in cases before it, even if existing laws are insufficient to do so.

Has Article 142 been used in landmark cases?

Yes, Article 142 has been invoked in landmark decisions such as the Ayodhya land dispute, the Bhopal Gas Tragedy compensation, and several cases involving social reforms and rights protections.

Are there any limits to the Supreme Court’s powers under Article 142?

While Article 142 grants broad authority, the Court typically uses it sparingly and avoids contradicting established statutory laws, respecting the separation of powers with the legislature and executive.

Why is Article 142 sometimes controversial?

Critics say Article 142 can lead to judicial overreach, blurring lines between judiciary and legislature, especially if used frequently or to make new policies. Supporters argue that it prevents injustice when laws fall short.

Can Article 142 override all laws?

Article 142 allows the Court to transcend legal technicalities, but it cannot be used to routinely override essential statutory provisions or constitutional safeguards.

How does Article 142 impact everyday citizens?

Article 142 helps ensure that justice is not hindered by procedural gaps or delays, benefiting citizens in complex or unprecedented cases where existing law may be silent or ambiguous.