Supreme Court Hearing-Presidential Reference On Timelines For Bills' Assent-DAY-2 : Live Updates

SG: let us not give an intepretation which kills the power. When Bill is passed by legislative assembly, it will be represented to Governor who shall declare either assents, withhold assent therefrom, reserves for consideration of President, provided Governor may as soon as possible after presentation of Bill, return the Bill ...when bill is returned, the House shall reconsider and Bill is passed against and presented to Governor, he shall not withhold assent.

You will not kill it thereafter, both words are used in same provision. Going it further, suppose he reserves, 201 comes into play. We talk it withhold is temporary withholding.

SG: on withholding, what I saying is really on interpretation of the Constitution. Functionally, these are plenary constitutional powers, a possibility of misuse may not guide its interpretation

CJI: the presumption is high constitutional functionaries must act bona fide

Bench assembled.

Arguments will continue post lunch.

SG: some examples- where what Governor could do? he is not a postman, he represents the Government of India, appointed by the President...President acts on Council of Ministers which are responsible to entire Parliament.

1. legislative session bills fixing only 2 sittings

2. confidence motion bills requiring 2/3 majority

SG: two judge bench in TN replies on three judge in Punjab judgment which talks view that withhold has to be read with first proviso which is erroneous and is in ignorance of other judgments

SG reads dictionary meaning of withhold.

SG: nowhere in subsequent part of Article 200, as soon as possible is used, that means, the Constitution did not intent to put time limit on exercising of three options...framers consciously avoided time line. Time limit prescribed was consciously dropped in Article 111 and was replaced by as soon as possible. Article 201 has given time limit.

J Narasimha: time limit is for the House to reconsider

CJI: could be read if Bill is not considered within 6 months, it lapse

SG: my point, reading time limit when not provided amounts to amending the Constitution.

SG: Suppose in case of High Court, Governor is bound to send it to President but in other cases, he may not.

CJI: when specific power has been given to not assent to, can it not be read that that power is not granted in other?

SG gives some example where Governor has to withhold simplicter- where Bill removes reservation, or one State legislature preventing another State residents from entering the State- one state hospital was flooded during COVID, barricades were created to withhold people from coming to the State, or state legislature mandating use of one language or legislature excluding class of people from voting on sex, race, etc