The Supreme Court on Tuesday emphasized the importance of periodic legislative reviews to assess the efficacy and shortcomings of laws, during a hearing involving a plea by former Union minister Maneka Gandhi. The plea contested the 45-day limit for filing election petitions under the Representation of the People Act.
Justices Surya Kant and N Kotiswar Singh remarked on the need for systematic evaluations of legislation, not just through judicial scrutiny but also via legislative reviews. “Whenever a new law is enacted, there should be its legislative review from time to time. Reviews should not only be confined to judicial reviews but there should be even legislative review. You may have it every 20 years, 25 years, or say 50 years, it will help in examining the shortcomings, if any,” the bench stated.
The court declined to examine Gandhi’s specific plea on the grounds that it could not legislate or open the floodgates for similar demands but underscored the need for an expert body dedicated to the review process. This body would be tasked with identifying deficiencies and ambiguous areas within existing laws.
Senior advocate Siddharth Luthra, representing Gandhi, concurred with the court’s perspective, advocating for a continual audit of legislation to ensure laws remain relevant and effective. “We can’t have legislation that is cast in stone. That unless a stimulus comes either from the court or otherwise and then there is an amendment,” he expressed.
