Supreme Court to review demonetisation case, seeks affidavits from central government and RBI, now hearing on November 9

The Supreme Court will hear about demonetisation on November 9. Let it be known that the hearing on the constitutional validity of demonetisation by the Modi government in the year 2016 was held today on Wednesday. After the hearing, the SC asked the central government and the RBI to file detailed affidavits. This matter will be heard on November 9. Remember that in 2016, the central government had canceled the 500 and 1000 rupee notes. 59 petitions have been filed against this in the court. The Supreme Court, while hearing the case, today said that it is aware of the Laxman Rekha line on judicial review of policy decisions of the government, but will have to examine the 2016 demonetisation decision to decide whether the issue has become a mere academic exercise. is

SC's Constitution Bench issues notice on all intervening applications & fresh petitions challenging Centre's decision to demonetize Rs 500 & 1,000 notes in 2016 & consider whether issue of demonetisation is academic. Centre & RBI seek time to file affidavits. Next hearing, Nov 9 pic.twitter.com/77sNZNeNLj

— ANI (@ANI) October 12, 2022

A five-judge bench headed by SA Najir said that when an issue arises before the Constitution Bench, it is its duty to respond. During the hearing, Attorney General R Venkataramani said that until the demonetisation act is properly challenged, the issue will necessarily remain academic. That the Demonetisation Act 1978 was passed to provide in public interest for demonetisation of certain high value notes, so as to check illegal transfer of money harmful to the economy.

It is a waste of constitutional bench time

The Supreme Court said that to declare whether it is academic or futile, it needs to examine the case as both parties are not in agreement. The court said, to answer the question, we have to hear. However, appearing for the central government, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said that the court’s time should not be wasted on educational issues. It is said that this is a waste of constitutional bench time.

A separate Act of Parliament is required for demonetisation

Senior advocate Shyam Dewan, representing one of the petitioners, Vivek Narayan Sharma, objected to Mehta’s contention, saying that he was surprised by the words like “waste of time” of the Constitution bench, as the previous bench had said that a constitution bench should deal with such cases. should be placed before Senior counsel for one party P. Chidambaram said that the issue is not academic and it has to be decided by the apex court. He said that a separate Act of Parliament is required for this type of demonetisation. Note that on December 16, 2016, a bench headed by the then CJI TS Thakur referred the demonetisation validity petition to a larger bench of five judges.