Page 39 - ELT_15th May 2020_VOL 372_Part 4th

2020 ] DOING COMPLETE JUSTICE IN ANY CAUSE OR MATTER UNDER ARTICLE 142 A131

Ors. (AIR 2008 SC 2781) and it was observed that it was advisable to leave its
power undefined and uncatalogued so that it remains elastic enough to be mold-
ed to suit the given situation; even where no alternative remedy is efficacious
due to lapse of time:
Logic behind necessity of such wide, comprehensive and supplementary
provision under Article 142 has been explained in K.M. Nanavati v. The State of
Bombay now Maharashtra case :
“18. …… The power which was vested in the Crown to grant special leave to
appeal to convicted persons from India has now been conferred on this Court
under Art. 136. The power under Art. 138 can be exercised in respect of “any
judgment, decree, determination, sentence or order in any cause or matter
passed or made by any Court or Tribunal in the territory of India.’’ This wide
and comprehensive power in respect of any determination by any Court or
tribunal must carry with it the power to pass orders incidental or ancillary to
the exercise of that power. Hence the wide powers given to this Court under
Art. 142 “to make such order as is necessary for doing complete justice in any
cause or matter pending before it.’’ As already indicated, the power of this
Court to pass an order of suspension of sentence or to grant bail pending the
disposal of the application for special leave to appeal has not been disputed
and could not have been disputed keeping in view the very wide terms in
which Art. 142 is worded….”
[K.M. Nanavati v. The State of Bombay (now Maharashtra) - AIR 1961 SC
112]
This decision was relied in State of U.P. v. Poosu and Another case and it
was observed :
“13. Thus there can be no doubt that this Court while granting special leave
to appeal against an order of acquittal on a capital charge is competent by vir-
tue of Article 142 read with Article 136, to exercise the same powers which
the High Court has under Section 427.”
[State of U.P. v. Poosu and Another -AIR 1976 SC 1750]
Conditions of the Exercise of This Jurisdiction :
In respect to the conditions subject to which the power is to be exercised
and its sparing exercise, it has been observed in Chandrakant Patil v. State through
CBI case :
“9. It is now well high settled that Supreme Court’s power under Article
142 of the Constitution are vastly broad based. That power in its exercise is
circumscribed only by two conditions, first is that it can be exercised only
when Supreme Court otherwise exercises its jurisdiction and the other is that
the order which Supreme Court passes must be necessary for doing complete
justice in the cause or matter pending before it…”
13. We are aware that powers under Article 142 are not to be exercised fre-
quently but only sparingly.…”
[Chandrakant Patil v. State through CBI - AIR 1998 SC 1165]
Power not to be exercised to override or ignore express statutory provision :
It was observed in E.S.P. Rajaram and Others v. Union of India and Others
case that this power is not to be exercised to override any express provisions :

EXCISE LAW TIMES  15th May 2020  39