Courts cannot fix timeline for Guvs, Prez to giveassent to Bills passed by Assembly: SC

PTI, NEW DELHI, NOV 20, 2025 : The Supreme Court on Thursday said that deemed consent of the Governor or the President on Bills at the expiry of a judicially set timeline is virtually a "takeover and substitution" of the executive functions by the judiciary, which is impermissible. It said that the concept of deemed assent of pending Bills by the court, in exercise of jurisdiction under Article 142, is virtually a takeover of the role and function of a separate Constitutional authority.

In its unanimous opinion on the Presidential Reference, a five-judge Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice B R Gavai said the concept of 'deemed assent' in the context of Articles 200 and 201 presupposes that one Constitutional authority, that is, the court, could play a "substitutional role" for another Constitutional functionary, namely the Governor or the President. "Such an usurpation of the gubernatorial function of the Governor, and similarly of the President's functions, is antithetical to the separation of powers—which is a part of the basic structure of the Indian Constitution," the bench said.

The bench, also comprising Justices Surya Kant, Vikram Nath, P S Narasimha, and A S Chandurkar, said reliance on Article 142 cannot lead to supplanting Constitutional provisions themselves. Article 142 of the Constitution empowers the top court to pass any decree or order necessary for doing "complete justice" in any case or matter pending before it.

"We have no hesitation in concluding that deemed consent of the Governor or President, under Article 200 or 201 at the expiry of a judicially set timeline, is virtually a takeover and substitution of the executive functions by the judiciary through judicial pronouncement, which is impermissible within the contours of our written Constitution," the bench said. While Article 200 of the Constitution deals with assent to Bills, Article 201 pertains to Bills reserved for consideration.