• +91 9632247247
  • Sign In/Sign Up
  • Menu
  • +Clients Back

    • Get Free Legal Answers
    • Get Fee Estimates
    • Find Lawyers
  • +Lawyers

    • Case Diary & Office Manager
    • Post News & Artilces
    • Post Jobs & Internships
  • +Law Students

    • Campus Ambassadors
    • Find Jobs & Internships
    • Post News & Articles
    • Resource Sharing
  • +Law Schools

    • Post Admissions
    • Post Opportunities
    • Get Law School Rating

  • Home
  • Legal News
  • The Supreme Court rejects appeals against the 2016 demonetisation

Latest News

Back

The Supreme Court rejects appeals against the 2016 demonetisation

Courtesy/By: Arryan Mohanty  |  02 Jan 2023     Views:210

A petition contesting the Central government's decision to demonetise 1,000 and 500 rupee notes in 2016 was dismissed by a five-judge Supreme Court bench on Monday. The judgement on many appeals against the Central government's 2016 demonetisation programme was given by the Constitution Bench of Justices S Abdul Nazeer, BR Gavai, AS Bopanna, V Ramasubramanian, and BV Nagarathna.

"It has been recognised that there needs to be a great deal of restraint before interfering in subjects of economic significance...we cannot displace such views with the judicial one," Justice Gavai said in delivering the majority opinion. He further said, "The Center and the RBI held discussions for a total of six months. We maintain that there was a justifiable connection for bringing such a measure, and we maintain that the theory of proportionality did not apply to demonetisation." Justice Gavai concluded that the RBI lacked the authority to implement demonetisation. "As a result, the Center's authority cannot be construed as being limited to a single series of bank notes. It applies to all series of currencies. According to Section 26(2) of the RBI Act, there is not an excessive amount of delegation, hence it cannot be invalidated. The proportionality test is passed, and the notification is valid. The time frame for the exchange of notes cannot be deemed unreasonable."

However, Justice Nagarathna disagreed with the answers to each of the questions and issued a dissenting ruling. "I've said before that the RBI is the backbone of the Indian economy. I have mentioned examples of previous global demonetisation exercises. Examining Section 26(2) would not imply sitting over the merits of demonetisation, and as such, it is fully within the Lakshman Rekha as drawn by this Court. The court is not to seat over the merits of economic or financial decisions." She continued to argue, "A much more significant problem affecting citizens than demonetisation at the behest of the Central government. Since the Center has such broad powers, in my opinion, plenary legislation must be used to accomplish the same thing." “A democracy cannot flourish without Parliament, she continued, "and Parliament cannot be kept out of such crucial issues." Significantly, she maintained, "The clause in Section 26(2) [of the RBI Act] itself contains an inherent contradiction. It can be seen from the documents provided by the RBI that the Central government recommended demonetization. This demonstrates that the RBI did not exercise independent judgement." 

The Court had framed eleven legal questions in response to the collection of submissions opposing the action. The petitioners raised the following major arguments more than six years after the move:

  • The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) Act's Section 26(2), which enables the government to declare all series of a specific denomination to no longer be a legal currency, is excessively broad;
  • The recommendation failed to take into account pertinent factors; The decision-making process was seriously defective;
  • The demonetization's declared goals were not met;
  • The action does not pass the proportionality requirement;
  • A declaratory remedy may be moulded and granted by the Court.

Senior Counsel Shyam Divan argued on behalf of the petitioners that the Central Board of the RBI's suggestion was a need before the Central government could decide to implement demonetisation. He continued by saying that the Center had a responsibility to uphold the promise made in bank notes to pay bearers a certain amount in both writ and civil courts.

Senior Advocate Jaideep Gupta had stated that the timelines would have been worthless if every person had made specific demands and requested a writ of mandamus, speaking on behalf of the RBI. "Even if the Prime Minister had declared that additional time would be offered later rather than 50 days, there is still no evidence that promissory estoppel would have applied. Beyond that time, we made no guarantees."

Attorney General (AG) for India R Venkataramani, on behalf of the Central government, emphasised that the distinctions created for different categories' grace periods were not made at random. Regarding a petitioner's claim that their right to dignity was violated, the AG had stated, "The dignity factor ought to be kept for more priceless cases. There is no issue of dignity when an NRI travels abroad for financial gain. Privacy and other aspects of dignity."

For the Supreme Court to decide whether the 2016 demonetisation process was legally valid, senior advocate P Chidambaram has urged the Central government to release records detailing how the decision was made. On the last day of the hearing, the Court asked for some confidential documents related to the ruling from the Central government in a sealed cover.

 


Courtesy/By: Arryan Mohanty  |  02 Jan 2023     Views:210

News Updates

Supreme Court’s Triple Talaq Judgement Would App...
30 Jan 2023     Views:397
Article 311(1) | An Order of Removal From Service ...
26 Jan 2023     Views:796
Leaders shouldn't disrespect the President or Pri...
17 Jan 2023     Views:287
New bench will hear Ashwini Upadhyay's Supreme Cou...
15 Jan 2023     Views:388
Person Who Drove Rashly with the Knowledge that it...
12 Jan 2023     Views:358
The rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act cannot b...
11 Jan 2023     Views:356
Supreme Court sends a notice about a petition for ...
09 Jan 2023     Views:672
The Meghalaya High Court's hold on the MoU definin...
08 Jan 2023     Views:698
Google's appeal of the ?1,337 crore fine from the ...
04 Jan 2023     Views:164
SC Issues Notice In A Batch Of Pleas Challenging T...
03 Jan 2023     Views:235
The Supreme Court rejects appeals against the 2016...
02 Jan 2023     Views:210
Chanda Kochhar and her husband Deepak Kochhar rema...
01 Jan 2023     Views:240
Gender Discrimination in intestate succession unde...
29 Dec 2022     Views:443
Section 300 CrPC BarTrial of a Person Not Only for...
29 Dec 2022     Views:257
Centre Informs Rajya Sabha That There Is No Propos...
28 Dec 2022     Views:239
Calcutta High Court: Depriving wife of her Stridha...
27 Dec 2022     Views:354
Sec 498A: An Apology should be tempered with genui...
24 Dec 2022     Views:210
Kerala High Court: Search engines like Google cann...
23 Dec 2022     Views:275
Rules of the Game Cannot be Changed After the Game...
23 Dec 2022     Views:464
Bombay High Court: Social Media has become an impo...
21 Dec 2022     Views:376
Calcutta High Court Grants Bail to Murder Accused ...
19 Dec 2022     Views:281
Sec 438 CrPC: Anticipatory Bail Plea is Not Mainta...
19 Dec 2022     Views:298
Rights of secured creditors under SARFAESI, Recove...
18 Dec 2022     Views:215
Can a man accuse his wife of domestic violence? De...
17 Dec 2022     Views:473
CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF BAIL PROVISIONS UNDER THE IND...
15 Dec 2022     Views:443
Guardianship of an illegitimate minor granted to h...
14 Dec 2022     Views:209
Under the POCSO Act, rehabilitation of the victim ...
14 Dec 2022     Views:211
CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF BAIL PROVISIONS UNDER THE IND...
13 Dec 2022     Views:495
The current collegium system shouldn't be abandone...
10 Dec 2022     Views:261
Framing of a uniform marriage code applicable to a...
09 Dec 2022     Views:298
Telangana High Court: Appropriation of a Decree of...
07 Dec 2022     Views:211
Appointment Cannot Be Denied Merely Because The Ca...
06 Dec 2022     Views:419
FIR has been Lodged for Settling Monetary Dispute-...
06 Dec 2022     Views:253
Form 16 Issued By Employer Is Reliable Evidence To...
06 Dec 2022     Views:706
Bombay high court issued instructions in a PIL loo...
06 Dec 2022     Views:527
CA Cannot Be Prosecuted for ingenuine documents su...
05 Dec 2022     Views:417
Bombay High Court Slams Maharashtra's State Mental...
04 Dec 2022     Views:143
Ex-parte order passed by Delhi High Court for prot...
04 Dec 2022     Views:188
AFTER HAVING CONSENSUAL INTERCOURSE, DECLINING TO ...
30 Nov 2022     Views:296
Allahabad HC Rules That Marriage Certificate Issue...
29 Nov 2022     Views:420
CALCUTTA HIGH COURT ASKS BCI TO REPLY TO THE PLEA ...
28 Nov 2022     Views:153
Second and Successive Anticipatory Bail Applicatio...
26 Nov 2022     Views:241
Court Sentences Man To Six-Month Imprisonment For ...
26 Nov 2022     Views:158
Delhi High Court awards grande legal costs of Rs. ...
24 Nov 2022     Views:239
What Will Happen If Lawyers Go on Strike and Meet ...
23 Nov 2022     Views:196
KERALA HC HELD THAT HUSBAND IS LIABLE FOR SEX WITH...
23 Nov 2022     Views:1058
SC Refuses To Entertain Plea Seeking Two Child Pol...
22 Nov 2022     Views:178
DUE TO DISTRICT JUDGES' RELUCTANCE TO GRANT BAIL O...
21 Nov 2022     Views:158
Supreme Court seeks Union Government to answer a p...
21 Nov 2022     Views:209
SOCIETY'S OUTRAGE NOT GROUND TO SUPPRESS FREE SPEE...
20 Nov 2022     Views:175
Plea for guidelines on seizure of digital device...
19 Nov 2022     Views:202
MLA Poaching case...
19 Nov 2022     Views:140
Supreme Court stays Bombay High Court's observatio...
18 Nov 2022     Views:183
P&H HC SAYS, CHEQUE BOUNCE COMPLAINT FILED ON THE ...
16 Nov 2022     Views:189
J&K will always be part of India; Civil society gr...
15 Nov 2022     Views:195
POCSO not meant to criminalise consensual romantic...
14 Nov 2022     Views:217
CONTEMPT OF COURT CAN’T BE ISSUED ON THE SHEER G...
14 Nov 2022     Views:217
POSCO ACT Slightest penetration will constitute ag...
13 Nov 2022     Views:220
Police Reforms not possible unless police official...
12 Nov 2022     Views:201
GYANVAPI-KASHI VISHWANATH: ALLAHABAD HC DIRECTS AS...
12 Nov 2022     Views:156
NO RIGHT EXISTS FOR A SUBSEQUENT PURCHASER TO CLAI...
12 Nov 2022     Views:227
United Nations calls for Investigation into protes...
08 Jul 2022     Views:563
5 Verdict by SC And NGT brought 8k crore cost to G...
08 Jul 2022     Views:655
Right to Abortion struck down by US Supreme Court...
02 Jul 2022     Views:579
UNHRC to hold a special session to discuss Ukraine...
21 May 2022     Views:617
Putin Responsible for war crimes: Justin Trudeau d...
20 May 2022     Views:596
Sri Lanka: former President calls for new polls as...
20 May 2022     Views:506
CAA will be implemented once Covid Subsides: Amit ...
18 May 2022     Views:547
Modi to improve bilateral relations with Nepal dur...
15 May 2022     Views:517
Moscow hopes for a peace settlement: Vladimir Puti...
13 May 2022     Views:461
Unique opportunity for sustainable and inclusive g...
29 Apr 2022     Views:390
PM Modi to inaugurate India’s flagship Foreign p...
27 Apr 2022     Views:381
Emanuel Macron defeats Marine Le Pen for a second ...
26 Apr 2022     Views:452
India suspends tourists visas for Chinese national...
26 Apr 2022     Views:384
Defence minister asks US defence firms to tap ‘M...
24 Apr 2022     Views:325
India and crisis-hit Sri Lanka revive talks to lin...
24 Apr 2022     Views:469
Government should take an unequivocal stand in the...
23 Apr 2022     Views:353
IMF lauds India’s high growth rate...
22 Apr 2022     Views:371
China and Solomon Islands sign a military pact....
21 Apr 2022     Views:651
Russia Suspended from United Nations Human Rights ...
09 Apr 2022     Views:782
Delhi HC: Order CBI to revoke travel ban on Aakar ...
09 Apr 2022     Views:473
Nagaland first women MP Phangnon Konyak takes oath...
07 Apr 2022     Views:565
Widespread protests amid Sri Lanka’s economic cr...
07 Apr 2022     Views:353
Government servants cannot take part in protest: K...
01 Apr 2022     Views:346
RUSSIA-UKRAINE : PEACE TALKS BEGIN IN TURKEY....
30 Mar 2022     Views:450
Sc asks Tushar Mehta to clarify Centre’s stand o...
30 Mar 2022     Views:408
NO-TRUST MOTION AGAINST PM IMRAN KHAN IN PAKISTAN ...
27 Mar 2022     Views:429
NATO TO PROVIDE NUCLEAR THREAT PROTECTION TO UKRAI...
27 Mar 2022     Views:475
KOLKATA HC:SUBMIT STATUS REPORT ON BIRBHUM VIOLENC...
24 Mar 2022     Views:463
Russia warns about using nuclear weapon if there i...
24 Mar 2022     Views:564
Sri Lanka facing the worst economic crisis....
23 Mar 2022     Views:411
Lok Sabha: Updates on the second budget session...
14 Mar 2022     Views:349
Madras High Court held that using government emplo...
01 Mar 2022     Views:575
Russia closes Airspace for UK flights...
27 Feb 2022     Views:515
Karnataka High Court reserves judgment on hijab ca...
27 Feb 2022     Views:499
Delhi High Court ordered Twitter to take down the ...
25 Feb 2022     Views:464
ED conducts raid at the India Bulls finance Centre...
22 Feb 2022     Views:417
India and UAE signed a Free Trade Agreement worth ...
21 Feb 2022     Views:410
Refund of the fines collected by the UP Govt again...
20 Feb 2022     Views:422
Comprehensive Legislation for Domestic Workers is ...
18 Feb 2022     Views:714
FIND A LAWYER




FIND A LAW SCHOOL



Most Read News Articles

  • Sabrimala Verdict (28 sept 2018) - A End of Taboo.
    On 07 Oct 2020    Views:90495
  • DOCTRINE OF ELECTION UNDER TRANSFER OF PROPERTY ACT, 1882
    On 08 Jul 2020    Views:62143
  • Case Analysis: THE BERUBARI UNION CASE
    On 14 Dec 2020    Views:61798
  • Case Analysis: Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum vs Union of India
    On 11 Dec 2020    Views:50671
  • A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras (1950 AIR 27, 1950 SCR 88)
    On 08 Nov 2020    Views:50011
View all >>

Propertified Propertified Propertified Propertified Propertified Propertified Propertified Propertified Propertified

86540

Lawyers Network

103860

Users

630

Cities Serving

114

Law Schools Network

59824

Law Students Network

About us

  • Company Profile

Indian Major Laws

  • Indian Constitution
  • IPC
  • CrPC
  • CPC
  • Companies Act
  • Indian Evidence Act
  • CGST Act
  • Limitation Act

Policies

  • Terms of Use
  • Privacy Policy
  • Refund & Cancellation

    Ads & Media

  • Resource Sharing
  • Advertiser(Sign Up/Login)
  • Media

    Careers

  • Internships
  • Jobs
  • Student Journalists

    HELP & SUPPORT

  • Contact Us
  • Grievances
  • Test

News

  • Legal News
  • Post Article
  • Post Interview

Legal Library

  • Central Acts
  • Deeds Drafts [1127 ]
  • Legal Maxims

Connect

Lawsisto Direct

 

  •  
  •  
DISCLAIMER
Copyright © Lawsisto Private Limited. All rights reserved.
Unless otherwise indicated, all materials on these pages are copyrighted by Lawsisto Private Limited. All rights reserved. No part of these pages, either text or image may
be used for any purpose. By continuing past this page, you agree to our Terms of Service, Cookie Policy, Privacy Policy and Content Policies.