In 2017, the government passed the Tribunals Reforms Act as part of the Finance Act, which is a type of law called a money Bill. A money Bill deals with issues like taxes or spending public money and does not need approval from the Rajya Sabha, one of India’s houses of Parliament.
Recently, the Supreme Court of India looked at a challenge to the way the government used money Bills. The court decided that the government’s use of money Bills for certain laws, like the one introducing electoral bonds, needed further examination by a larger bench.
One judge, Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud, disagreed with how the government used money Bills. He said it was like tricking or cheating and breaking the rules of the Constitution. This means he thought the government was using money Bills to make laws in a way that was not fair according to the Constitution.
The Supreme Court also needs to decide about other laws that were passed using money Bills, such as changes to the Prevention of Money Laundering Act and the Aadhaar Act. These laws might be canceled if the court decides they were not passed in the right way.
The government says that the Speaker of the Lok Sabha, the lower house of Parliament, has the final say on whether a bill is a money Bill. However, some argue that no one should have unchecked power, even the Speaker.
Money Bills are important because they let the government make laws without the full checking of Parliament, especially when it doesn’t have enough support in the Rajya Sabha. The Supreme Court’s decisions will make laws in India different.
In simple terms, the Supreme Court is looking closely at how the government uses money Bills to see if certain laws were made the right way. This makes us wonder: does the government or Parliament have more power, and how does this affect how laws are made in India
See also: Farmers’ Protest in India: Talks Continue Amidst Growing Agitation
