NALIN KHANNA

03151103517
CASE ANALYSIS
Of
SAUMYA RAYAPPA BOMMAI
Versus UOI
SUBMITTED TO
MS.NAVJOT SURI
ASSISTANT PROFESSOR LAW
SR BOMMAI versus union of India relates to article 356 of Indian constitution which states
President’s rule over India the major part of Centre and state relation is discussed in article
356 of Indian constitution
There are some important facts of the case are –
1. In 1989 In Karnataka due to the arbitrary exercise of the article 356 state emergency
was put up, this further was confirmed by the Parliament as required by the article
356(3).
2. The situation which led to the emergency was that S.R. BOMMAI who was the leader
of the party in 1988 he became the chief minister of Karnataka but subsequently joined
Lok Dal formed a collision with Janata Dal.
3. But soon there were some issues between the members of the party which led to fall in
the government.
4. Therefore president had to proclaim emergency
5. Which led to a challenge by the state government which was exhausting and a writ
petition was filed in the High Court of Karnataka but it was dismissed and hence they
appealed to the Supreme Court.
There are basically three main issues which were raised in front of Supreme Court of India
1. Whether the proclamation of President’s rule of ART. 356 justifiable?
2. Does president has power without restriction to declare emergency?
3. And the declaration can be challenged even after approval of Parliament’s
both house?

1. S.R. BOMMAI
1994 AIR 19181994 SCC (3), 1,
JT1994 (2)21.1994 SCALE(2)37
In 1994 on 11th March a judgement was passed by Supreme Court of India which is based on
declaration of emergency under ART. 356 which is subjected under examination of
legislature-
1. There are some restrictions on the application of state emergency based on
Governor’s report and not for the satisfaction of central government.
2. The Supreme Court can struck down the proclamation even if both Parliament
houses take the same decision going against the state government.
3. The power of the President to dismiss the government is not absolute.
4. Once the legislative assembly which has been suspended can be activated
again.
5. The president can use this power only after the proclamation of both the
houses of the Parliament
6. Article 356 is a case of examination by judiciary
What is importance of the SR BOMMAI versus the Union of India case?
The SR BOMMAI this led to the historic change in the article 356 of the Constitution of
India The case ended the arbitrary exercise of the CG over SG which means earlier parties of
central used this weapon against the state assembly to destroy it but this led to a growth in the
development of the small parties which gave power to state government and it actually
imposed the originality or the proper use of article 356 and hence helped the state
government.
The verdict that is SR BOMMAI said that there is no uncertain terms to test the majority of
government should be done in the floor of the assembly and it should not be based only on
governor’s opinion so it somehow made a win situation to democracy and lead to reduction
of dictatorship in the Constitution.
According to my reading and study the case SR BOMMAI versus Union of India falls under
the (Authoritative Element of a Judicial Decision) so it further falls under the judicial
precedent and it also falls under Realist school of jurisprudence.
This is a distinguishing feature of English, American and Indian law. The doctrine pre-
supposes assistance of the hierarchy of courts and then it is said that a judicial decision of a
higher court has a binding force of lower courts. It is not how forever the whole judgement
that is to be binding then what part of it? In the course of his long opinion a judge says
number of things such a statement of fact issues involved, matter of evidence, statements of
law, reasons for such statement ultimate decision. Which one of them should be taken as
precedent? The question is about what makes law?.
Different aspects of the decision – Every statement made by the judge in a judicial decision is
not binding in future case a decision generally has three aspects namely –
1. Once a decision has been given it is practically binding on the parties to the suit is
said to be res judicata. And cannot be taken over again for future.
2. Practical decisions taken which operates as precedent has the force of law. General
principle when applied in the decision is known as ratio decedendi.
3. Observations made by the judge which have impacted him and judge has said
anything by the way seeing the observation these statements are called obiter dicta.
Meaning of Ratio decedendi:

1. S.R. BOMMAI
1994 AIR 19181994 SCC (3), 1,
JT1994 (2)21.1994 SCALE(2)37
The term ratio decedendi means the rule of law on which a judicial decision is based. The
particular result of case is restrictedly followed by parties, ratio decedendi solely has the legal
force as regards the whole world at large. Every decision results to something which is
followed in general or parties to the suit. And it is ratio decidendi

Obiter dictum
This means statement by the way what judge has said unwantedly. Charges often
expressed judicial perspective on cases they are not given. Attorneys have habit of telling the
reason with reflation to imaginary thoughts, passing remarks about the situation etc. It is
either ways presumably not necessary to result.
In S.R.BOMMAI vs UOI (1994) 3 SCC 1, the 9 Judges bench of SC said that secularism is
most important structure of Indian Constitution Justice SAWANT and KULDEEP Singh
observed that social clothes is one of the basic structure is while justice are a MASWANY
observed that socialism, social Justice and fraternity included in the basic structure of the
Constitution .One of the judge AHMADI also said that the rights mentioned in ART. 15, 16
and 25 of India’s constitution had also made the part of the basic core of the constitution.
These observations of the following Judge is orbiter dicta as they were not directly in
problem in this particular case. The ratio of the case is that secularism is a part of the Basic
structure of the Constitution orbiter dicta in more casual expressions by the “which carry no
wait where as it emphasis on the secularism and focuses on the Constitution of India
therefore it falls under judicial president
Also
It comes under Realist School of Law because
Realist school focuses on one major point which is judge made laws, the laws made by judge
are said to be judge made laws when the sole of the law changes because of the misuse then
judge gives the right to verdict to make the law in control so as to save the rights as happened
in the case of S.R. BOMMAI he was drawn from his position and article 365 was applied and
when the case end it led to amendment in the article 365 as discussed above which was made
by the 9 judge bench and gave a major change in law i.e. state emergency was put in control
and hence the judge made law was prevailed over the country therefore realist school of law
applies to S.R. BOMMAI case .

1. S.R. BOMMAI
1994 AIR 19181994 SCC (3), 1,
JT1994 (2)21.1994 SCALE(2)37
Jurisprudence PSDA
by Nalin KHANNA
Submission date: 10-Apr-2020 03:37PM (UTC+0530)
Submission ID: 1293897597
File name: SR_Bommai_Case.docx (20.62K)
Word count: 1207
Character count: 5731

6 %
SIMILARITY INDEX

6%
INTERNET SOURCES

0%
PUBLICATIONS

4%
STUDENT PAPERS

1 4%
2 2%
Exclude quotes On
Exclude bibliography On
Exclude matches < 14 words
Jurisprudence PSDA
ORIGINALITY REPORT
PRIMARY SOURCES

multiplekhoj.blogspot.com
Internet Source

1. S.R. BOMMAI
1994 AIR 19181994 SCC (3), 1,
JT1994 (2)21.1994 SCALE(2)37
onelawstreet.com
Internet Source

1. S.R. BOMMAI
1994 AIR 19181994 SCC (3), 1,
JT1994 (2)21.1994 SCALE(2)37