Sachet Singh and Devdeep Ghosh here surveys different judgments of the Apex Court and contextualize it from the two frameworks of detonology and consequentialism.
Article 142 of the Constitution of India is the fountainhead
of the Supreme Court’s inherent powers to do ‘complete
justice’. A complete justice provision, by its very nature, is
controversial and often debated. It is evident from an
analysis of the case law pivoted around the use of Article
142 that the Apex Court has often shown scant regard to
statutory law when the operation of such statutory law has
been perceived as an impediment in the pursuit of justice.
The purpose of this paper is to survey the decisions of the
Apex Court and contextualize it within the framework of
two schools of jurisprudential thought – deontology and
consequentialism – in an effort to identify the underlying
thought process of various benches of the Supreme Court
over the years.