Vice President repeatedly challenged judiciary’s stance during tenure

New Delhi, July 22, 2025 – Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar repeatedly questioned the Supreme Court on the NJAC Act and Basic Structure doctrine, reigniting a national debate. The clash centered on the judiciary’s authority versus Parliament’s sovereignty. From public speeches to formal forums, Dhankhar often criticized how the court interpreted the NJAC Act and Basic Structure doctrine. He called this judicial overreach. His repeated focus on the NJAC Act and Basic Structure doctrine sparked sharp legal and political reactions. His persistent focus on the NJAC Act and Basic Structure doctrine sparked nationwide political and legal discussions

According to Dhankhar, Parliament’s authority faced serious compromise. Furthermore, he questioned whether unelected judges should have the final say on constitutional reforms. As a result, his views reignited debate over institutional power and judicial accountability.

In January 2023, at the 83rd All‑India Presiding Officers Conference in Jaipur, Dhankhar openly rejected the Basic Structure doctrine, laid down in the landmark Kesavananda Bharati judgment. “With due respect to the judiciary, I cannot subscribe to this doctrine,” he said. His statements drew both applause and criticism, as legal experts warned against undermining the judiciary’s constitutional role.

By March 2023, the Vice President once again referenced the NJAC Act while addressing a Rajya Sabha session following a controversy involving alleged cash recovery from a High Court judge’s residence. He reiterated that the lack of reforms like NJAC weakened judicial transparency and accountability. “Had NJAC not been struck down, things would have been different,” he asserted.

In April 2025, Dhankhar raised eyebrows once more. He questioned a Supreme Court order that set a three-month deadline for Governors and the President to assent to bills passed by state legislatures. “There is no visualization in the Constitution of any authority above Parliament,” he added. He called the ruling a “clear deviation from constitutional fundamentals.”

The NJAC Act and Basic Structure doctrine remained recurring points in Dhankhar’s speeches. He often cited them as examples of judicial overreach. In his view, they curtailed the democratic will of elected representatives. Legal scholars and former judges warned that Dhankhar’s stance could harm the balance of power. They pointed to risks between the executive, legislature, and judiciary.

Although Dhankhar clarified that his criticisms stemmed from his commitment to constitutional values and democratic integrity, his repeated remarks sparked national debate. Ultimately, his tenure as Vice President tested the boundaries between institutions.

the sustained focus on the NJAC Act and Basic Structure doctrine during Dhankhar’s term has reopened legal and political questions about institutional supremacy, judicial accountability, and constitutional interpretation. Whether his legacy sparks reforms or deepens rifts between government branches remains uncertain.

Source