Statutory Interpretation by Judiciary

Article 142 of the Indian Constitution empowers the Supreme Court to pass orders and decrees necessary to ensure "complete justice" in any case before it. This power is vast and extraordinary. Article 142 allows the Supreme Court to ensure that ordinary laws comply with the Constitution and that complete justice is delivered. Even if an ordinary law creates limitations, the Supreme Court can override it using Article 142 to achieve a just outcome.

Right to Privacy and Article 21: Article 21 of the Indian Constitution guarantees the right to life and personal liberty. In the landmark 2017 judgment of K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) vs. Union of India, the Supreme Court of India unanimously held that the right to privacy is an intrinsic part of Article 21. This ruling reinforced privacy as a fundamental right, ensuring protection against unwarranted state and private intrusions. Part III of the Constitution covers Fundamental Rights, which include: - Article 19: Right to freedom of speech and expression, freedom of movement, and other essential liberties. - Article 21: Right to life and personal liberty, which now includes privacy after the Puttaswamy judgment. Article 14: Ensures equality before the law, but does not explicitly deal with privacy. Article 17: Abolishes untouchability. Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSPs) are non-enforceable guidelines, not fundamental rights. Article 24: Prohibits child labor but has no relation to privacy. Thus, the right to privacy is most closely linked to Article 21 and the freedoms guaranteed in Part III of the Indian Constitution. Hence the correct answer is option (c).

Statement 1 is correct: The Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 was enacted based on the recommendations of the H.N. Sanyal Committee, which examined the law relating to contempt of courts. Statement 2 is correct: Articles 129 and 215 of the Constitution empower the Supreme Court and High Courts, respectively, to punish for contempt of themselves. Statement 3 is incorrect: The Constitution does not define civil contempt and criminal contempt; these are defined under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. Statement 4 is correct: Parliament has the power to make laws on contempt of court, as evidenced by the enactment of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

Statement 1 is correct: Under Article 128, the Chief Justice of India may, at any time, with the previous consent of the President, request a retired Judge of the Supreme Court or a retired Judge of a High Court (who is duly qualified) to sit and act as a Judge of the Supreme Court. Statement 2 is not correct: Although there is no explicit Article in the Constitution equivalent to Article 137 (which grants review power to the SC) for High Courts, the High Courts are "Courts of Record" under Article 215. As a Court of Record, a High Court has the inherent power to review its own orders and judgments to correct any patent error or prevent a miscarriage of justice. This has been affirmed by the Supreme Court in various rulings.

Statement I is correct: President’s pardoning power can be subjected to limited judicial review, especially on grounds like mala fides, irrelevant considerations, or arbitrariness (as held in Kehar Singh, Epuru Sudhakar cases). Statement II is incorrect: President cannot act independently; the power must be exercised on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers under Article 74.