1987 (12) TMI 32 - SC - Indian Laws

Whether the two Proclamations of Emergency were validly issued or not ? Whether each of the said Proclamations had ceased to be in force at the expiration of two months from the date on which each of them was issued as the resolutions of the Houses of Parliament approving each of them had not been published in the Official Gazette? Held that - The resolutions of the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha approving the two resolutions have been duly published in the official reports of the two Houses of Parliament. This ought to meet the contention of the petitioner that any public Act or resolution which affects public life should be given due publicity. We also hold that the production of the Lok Sabha Debates and of the Rajya Sabha Debates containing the proceedings of the two Houses of Parliament relating to the period between the time when the resolutions were moved in each of the two Houses of Parliament and the time when the resolutions were duly adopted amounts to proof of the said resolutions. The court is required to take judicial notice of the said proceedings under section 57 of the Indian Evidence Act 1872. We are therefore of the view that the two Proclamations of Emergency were kept in force by virtue of the resolutions passed by the Houses of Parliament until they were duly revoked by the two Proclamations which were issued by the Vice-President acting as President of India in the year 1977. Since the two Proclamations of Emergency were in force when the House of the People (Extension of Duration) Act 1976 (Act 30 of 1976) was passed its validity cannot be questioned. The Lok Sabha passed the Finance Act 1976 during the extended period of its duration and therefore the validity of the Finance Act 1976 also cannot be questioned. In view of the foregoing this petition should fail and it is accordingly dismissed.

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Validity of the Proclamation of Emergency issued on 3-12-1971.
2. Validity of the Proclamation of Emergency issued on 25-6-1975.
3. Validity of the House of the People (Extension of Duration) Act, 1976.
4. Validity of the Finance Act, 1976.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Validity of the Proclamation of Emergency issued on 3-12-1971:
The petitioner contended that the Proclamation of Emergency issued on 3-12-1971 was either ultra vires the Constitution or had ceased to be in operation on 4-2-1972. The Union of India opposed this, stating that the Proclamation was duly issued by the President and approved by both Houses of Parliament. The Proclamation was revoked by the Vice-President acting as President on 27-3-1977. The court found that the Proclamation was validly issued, as per Article 352 of the Constitution, which allows the President to declare an emergency if the security of India is threatened. The court also noted that the Proclamation was laid before both Houses of Parliament and approved by resolutions, although these resolutions were not published in the Official Gazette.

2. Validity of the Proclamation of Emergency issued on 25-6-1975:
The petitioner argued that the Proclamation of Emergency dated 25-6-1975 was either ultra vires the Constitution or had ceased to be in operation on 26-8-1975. The Union of India stated that this Proclamation was also duly issued and approved by both Houses of Parliament. It was revoked by the Vice-President acting as President on 21-3-1977. The court upheld the validity of this Proclamation as well, noting that it was issued due to internal disturbances threatening the security of India and was approved by resolutions in both Houses of Parliament.

3. Validity of the House of the People (Extension of Duration) Act, 1976:
The petitioner contended that the House of the People (Extension of Duration) Act, 1976, was ultra vires the Constitution because the Proclamations of Emergency had ceased to be in operation by the time the Act was passed. The Union of India argued that both Proclamations were in force when the Act was passed, thereby allowing Parliament to extend the House's duration. The court found that the Act was valid as both Proclamations of Emergency were in operation when the Act was enacted, and the extension was in accordance with Article 83(2) of the Constitution.

4. Validity of the Finance Act, 1976:
The petitioner challenged the Finance Act, 1976, on the grounds that it was passed by the Lok Sabha during its extended period, which was invalid. The Union of India contended that the Finance Act was validly passed as the extension of the Lok Sabha's duration was legitimate. The court upheld the validity of the Finance Act, 1976, stating that since the House of the People (Extension of Duration) Act, 1976, was valid, the Finance Act passed during the extended period was also valid.

Conclusion:
The court concluded that both Proclamations of Emergency were validly issued and remained in force until they were revoked in 1977. The House of the People (Extension of Duration) Act, 1976, and the Finance Act, 1976, were validly enacted. The petition was dismissed with no order as to costs.