Case Comment on - S.R. Bommai v. Union of India, (1994) 3 SCC

Abstract

The case of S.R. Bommai v Union of India is a landmark judgment related to Article 356 of the Constitution which talks about the President’s Rule that has been given by the Supreme Court. Article 356 was supposed to be used only in exceptional situations. It was an era when the central government was constantly accused of using its power to usurp the opposition parties in the state and establish president’s rule in the state. President’s rule had already been called up to 95 times until the judgment in this case was delivered. Therefore, the onus was on the Supreme Court to determine the meaning of Article 356 and establish its scope in order to prevent its misuse. The Court played its role as the interpreter of the law and its decision gave clarity about the scope of Article 356 and also elaborately mentioned the circumstances under which it is applicable. The Court laid emphasis on the Federal Structure of India and gave priority to the floor test of the assembly and not the judgment of the governor. The Court also discussed the idea of secularism in the judgment. The decision was given by a 9-judge Constitutional Bench of the Court and has been a pivotal one in the maintenance of the Federal structure of the country and has placed a limit on the central governments on misusing this provision to usurp the state government which have other parties in power. The impact of the decision is still felt in the modern times and helps maintain the democratic structure in India. The case comment analyses the decision and brings forth the jurisprudence applied by the court while arriving at the decision.