Write notes on following :
(i) आच्छादन का
सिद्धांत Doctrine of Eclipse
(ii) पृथक्करण का
सिद्धांत Doctrine of Severability
Answer(i)
The Doctrine of Eclipse is a legal principle in
constitutional law, particularly in the context of the interpretation of
statutes. It is used when a law or provision conflicts with the Constitution.
The doctrine essentially states that if a law is inconsistent with a
constitutional provision, it is not necessarily void, but rather
"eclipsed" or overshadowed by the Constitution. The law remains
valid, but its operation is suspended until the inconsistency is resolved.
Here’s a pointwise explanation:
1. Nature of
Eclipse: Under this doctrine, if a law or statutory provision is inconsistent
with a constitutional provision, it does not become void but gets eclipsed by
the Constitution. This means it remains in the statute book but is inoperative
to the extent of the inconsistency.
2. Temporary
Inoperability: The law is temporarily suspended but not completely void. The
suspension occurs only to the extent of the inconsistency with the
Constitution. The law is said to be overshadowed by the constitutional
provision.
3. Resumption
upon Change: If the constitutional provision that conflicts with the law is
amended or the conflict is resolved, the law that was previously eclipsed may
regain its full effect and operate once again.
4. Constitutional
Supremacy: The doctrine reinforces the supremacy of the Constitution,
highlighting that no law, however old, can operate in contravention of the
Constitution. A law that is inconsistent with the Constitution will remain
inactive but will not automatically be nullified.
5. Application
to Pre-Constitutional Laws: This doctrine is often applied to
pre-constitutional laws that were inconsistent with the provisions of the
Constitution. These laws are not void but are suspended to the extent of their
inconsistency with the Constitution.
6. Example:
A pre-constitutional law that violates the fundamental rights guaranteed by the
Constitution might be eclipsed. However, if the Constitution is amended in such
a way that the law is no longer inconsistent with the Constitution, the law may
once again become operational.
Case Law Example:
The Doctrine of Eclipse was discussed in cases like Bhikaji
Narain Dhakras v. State of Madhya Pradesh (1955) and Suraj Mall Mohta & Co.
v. A.D. Shroff (1954), where the courts clarified that a law inconsistent with
a fundamental right doesn't get wiped out but merely becomes unenforceable
while it is inconsistent.
In conclusion, the Doctrine of Eclipse ensures that laws
which conflict with constitutional provisions do not become void, but are
merely inoperative until the conflict is resolved, maintaining the
constitution’s supremacy while safeguarding the continued existence of such
laws.
Answer-(ii) The Doctrine of Severability is a principle of
statutory interpretation in law that allows a court to remove or
"sever" an unconstitutional part of a statute while leaving the rest
of it intact, if possible. It is used when part of a law is found to be
invalid, but the rest of the law can still stand and be enforced. This doctrine
ensures that laws are not entirely struck down because of one defective
provision, allowing the remaining provisions to continue in effect.
Here’s a pointwise explanation of the Doctrine of
Severability:
1. Concept of Severability:
• The
doctrine allows courts to separate the valid and invalid parts of a statute.
• When a
particular provision of a statute is found to be unconstitutional or invalid,
only that part is severed (removed), while the remaining provisions stay
effective.
2. Legal Basis:
• It
assumes that if the legislature had known a provision would be struck down,
they would have still passed the rest of the law.
• The
doctrine maintains the integrity of the law by ensuring that invalid parts
don’t invalidate the whole statute.
3. Judicial Role:
• The court
is tasked with determining whether the invalid portion of the statute is
severable from the rest.
• If the
invalid provision is essential to the statute's purpose, the entire law may be
struck down. However, if the provision can be removed without affecting the
law's purpose, it will be severed.
4. Principle of Presumption:
• The
presumption is that a statute is severable unless the legislature would not
have passed the law without the invalid provision.
• Courts
will often try to preserve the remaining parts of the statute unless it is
impossible to separate the valid and invalid portions.
5. Application in Case Law:
• Courts
may apply the Doctrine of Severability in cases where only part of a statute is
challenged. For example, if a law has an unconstitutional provision (such as
one violating fundamental rights), the court may strike down just that
provision and allow the rest of the law to stand.
• This
doctrine is commonly used in constitutional law to ensure that unconstitutional
laws don't lead to the complete loss of an otherwise valid law.
6. Example:
• If a
statute contains multiple sections and one section is declared unconstitutional
(e.g., violating freedom of speech), the court may remove just that section.
The remaining sections of the statute would still remain enforceable if they
are not dependent on the unconstitutional section.
7. Limitations:
• If the
invalid part is so central to the statute that its removal changes the entire
purpose of the law, the whole statute might be struck down.
• If the
severability clause is not included in the statute or if there is a clear
legislative intent to have the whole statute fall if one part is invalid, the
court may not sever the provision.
8. Severability Clause:
• A
severability clause in the statute explicitly expresses the legislature's
intention that the remaining provisions should continue to operate even if one
provision is declared unconstitutional.
In summary, the Doctrine of Severability ensures that only
the unconstitutional part of a statute is invalidated while preserving the
functioning of the rest of the law. It helps maintain the legislative intent
and avoids the complete invalidation of statutes based on one defect.
_____________________________________________
Doctrine of Severability:
Significance:
The Doctrine of Severability is important in constitutional
law and statutory interpretation as it helps maintain the constitutionality and
validity of a statute. This doctrine allows courts to remove or
"sever" unconstitutional or invalid portions of a statute while
preserving the valid and constitutional sections. It ensures that even if part
of a law is found to be unconstitutional, the rest of the statute can still
stand and be enforced.
Brief Summary:
The Doctrine of Severability operates under the principle
that if a portion of a statute is found to be unconstitutional or invalid, it
can be "severed" from the rest of the statute, leaving the remaining
provisions intact. Courts apply this doctrine by asking whether the statute
would have been enacted without the invalid portion. If so, the valid
provisions can continue to operate independently. It ensures that legislative
intent is respected, as far as possible, even in the face of constitutional
challenges.
Doctrine of Eclipse:
Significance:
The Doctrine of Eclipse is primarily applied in
constitutional law, particularly in the context of laws that may conflict with
fundamental rights. It allows a law that is inconsistent with a fundamental
right to remain dormant (or "eclipsed") until the constitutional
obstacle is removed. Once the obstacle is removed, the law can be revived or
enforced again.
Brief Summary:
The Doctrine of Eclipse applies when a pre-constitutional
law is inconsistent with fundamental rights. Such a law doesn't become void but
is temporarily "eclipsed" due to the conflict with the fundamental
rights guaranteed by the constitution. The law remains dormant until the
constitutional provision causing the conflict is amended or modified, at which
point the law can be revived. This doctrine ensures that laws do not
automatically become void but merely inactive, allowing for the possibility of
revival in the future.
In summary, Severability allows courts to separate
unconstitutional portions of a statute, while Eclipse applies to laws that are
inconsistent with fundamental rights, rendering them dormant but not void.
Comments
Post a Comment