SYNOPSIS OF THE DISSERTATION TO BE SUBMITTED

TO THE
FACULTY OF LAW
GAUHATI UNIVERSITY,
GUWAHATI
FOR THE DEGREE OF
MASTER OF LAW IN CONSTI TUTI ONAL LAW
NAME OF THE STUDENT Priyanka Choudhury
TITLE OF DISSERTATION
EMERGENCY PROVI SI ONS
UNDER THE I NDI AN
CONSTI TUTI ON
DEGREE LL.M.
SUBJECT CONSTI TUTI ONAL LAW
NAME OF THE GUIDING
LECTURER
Mrs. Gargee Bordoloi
ROLL NO. /NO. AND DATE
OF REGISTRATION
120/13
048959 of 2007-2008
PLACE OF RESEARCH WORK
NEF Law College Library and
Krishna Kanta Handique
Library, Gauhati University

Miss Priyanka Choudhury
LL.M. (Constitutional Law), 4th Semester
NEF Law College, Guwahati






TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION

2. PROCLAMATION OF NATIONAL EMERGENCY UNDER
INDIAN CONSTITUTION

3. CENTERS DUTY TO PROTECT THE STATES

4. IMPOSITION OF THE PRESIDENTS RULE DUE TO THE
FAILURE OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL MACHINERY IN A
STATE

5. THE POSITION OF THE FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS
DURING EMERGENCY

6. THE FINANCIAL EMERGENCY

7. CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS

8. BIBLIOGRAPHY



SYNOPSIS

EMERGENCY PROVISIONS UNDER INDIAN CONSTITUTION

In this dissertation project I propose to study the EMERGENCY
PROVI SI ONS UNDER I NDI AN CONSTI TUTI ON

INTRODUCTION
In the FIRST INTRODUCTORY CHAPTER, I propose to analyze the
Emergency provisions of the Indian Constitution.
A federal constitution is a complex document. It involves division of power
between two sets of government. There is a concentration of power in regard to
certain subjects in the Centre e.g. The Armed Forces, foreign relations, treaties,
etc. Yet there are some subjects in regard to which power rests totally in the
States e.g. agriculture, public order, police, prisons, etc. In normal times a
federation functions well. But when an enemy stands at the gate a unified and
effective response is needed expeditiously. During the 2
nd
World War the U.S.A
and Australia transformed their constitutions with considerable help from
judiciary. The post war federal Constitutions contain generally a mechanism in
the Constitution which converts it temporarily into a unitary one during an
emergency so that the federal principle is sacrificed for preserving the country.
Some constitutions are so moulded that they cannot shed their characteristics in
response to emergent situations. Our constitution has an in-built mechanism to
convert it into a more or less unitary form when the nation is faced with a
calamity. The U.S constitution lacks such approach during but during war the
U.S. judiciary gave wide interpretation to defence power strengthening the
hands of the Union.
Our constitution makers were framing the Constitution immediately after the 2
nd

world war came to an end. They considered it wise to provide in the
Constitution how the arrangement could be changed in times of extra-ordinary
peril. Federal power would expand. The country must make a united effort to
sustain itself in times of peril. The dividing lines would vanish. But as soon as
the calamity is over the normal provisions would be reset.
To guard against accidental emergence of dictatorship as a result of war,
external aggression or internal disturbance, it is always desirable to make
specific emergency provisions in the constitution. With this end in view, the
constitution of India has allotted a separate part altogether to the emergency
provisions. Part XVIII, therefore is an element of modernism in our
constitution.
The Indian constitution is described by Dr. Ambedkar as federal in times of
peace and unitary in times of war. It is admitted on all hands that the
administration of a country cant be carried on in times of war in the same
manner as in times of peace. In conflict of arms laws are silent. Emergency
does not create power, emergency may furnish the occasion for the use of
power. Although emergency may not call into life a power which has never
lived, nevertheless an emergency may afford a reason for the exertion of living
power already enjoyed.
Our structural design reflects adequate awareness of the governmental needs
both during normal and abnormal times. The emergency provisions were
conceived under the stress of crucial circumstances requiring quick
incorporation. The conditions prevailing at the time of framing of the Indian
constitution have an important bearing upon the formulation of emergency
provisions. The incidents occurring before and after independence compelled
the fathers of the Constitution to focus their attention on emergency provisions.
The whole atmosphere was explosive. There were horrible tales of arson,
murder, loot, political turmoil and unrest. It was a stormy and critical period in
our history. The partition let loose the hideous communal conflict with the flight
of millions from their hearths and homes unparallel in human history.

Types of emergencies under Indian constitution
Emergencies are abnormal circumstances not envisaged by the constitution.
Natural calamities and catastrophies like flood, famine, drought, earthquake and
the like may also constitute emergency. Bowle and Friedrich point out five
possible types emergencies, viz, war, economic depression, secession,
insurrection and subversion. Their classification of emergency is neither
scientific nor exhaustive. All the writers on the Constitution of India are
unanimous that there are three kinds of emergencies as provided in our
Constitution, viz.
a. An emergency due to war, external aggression or armed rebellion. Some
writers prefer to label it as national emergency. It may be noted that the
Constitution uses the expression Proclamation of Emergency to denote
an emergency of this kind (Art.352).

b. A situation arising out of failure of constitutional machinery in a State
which may be labelled as State Emergency (Art.356). The Constitution
does not employ the word emergency for this situation.

c. A situation in which the financial stability of India is threatened. The
Constitution refers it as Financial Emergency.(Art.360)


The divisive forces of linguism, communalism regionalism and casteism created
disharmony and disturbed the peace and order of the country. Intense communal
rivalry among the Hindus and the Muslims stimulated communal frenzy in
answer to the Muslim Leagues efforts to incite the Muslims. Such
disintegrating forces were the dangers for the establishment and maintenance of
democracy in this country. The federal constitutions have certain weaknesses in
times of crisis. Kashmir problem came up with the lapse of the Crowns
paramountcy when our constitution was in making. Though Kashmir has not
acceded to either of the Dominions, Indian government had to guarantee the
protection of Kashmir against constant Pakistani threat to seize Kashmir by
military force. Danger from Pakistan was imminent. There was the recalcitrant
attitude of some of the Native States towards joining the Indian Union.
Irresponsible and sinister forces were at work. Junagarh decided to accede to
Pakistan and Hyderabad declared itself independent on the eve of independence.
It was a great challenge for the government of India as no civilised government
could permit such separatist conduct of units of the body politic. Military action
in Junagarah and Hyderabad was necessary as a matter of geographical
compulsion. All these may be taken as motivations for article 352.
The early years of independence witnessed a spurt in the communist activities
among the workers and peasants in Telengana. The uprising of the communists
was a potential threat to the peace and democratic order of the country. This led
to the incorporation of stringent emergency provisions in the constitution.
Government of a province under the influence of ideology or a community
might disregard the federal constitution and the laws. Thus the constitution
makers were apprehensive of the regular and successful functioning of the state
governments. All this precipitated Article 356 to take care of the breakdown of
constitutional machinery in a state.
There was also a marked deterioration in the economic situation of the country
due to circumstances created by partition and fall in foreign exchange reserves.
Dr. Ambedkar wanted to avoid all the legal difficulties and thus came the
Article 360 of the Constitution.
No Chapter of the Constitution has been subject of more acrimonious attack by
the critics than those dealing with the emergency provisions. The Constituent
Assembly witnessed one of its most agitated scenes during the discussion of
these provisions. Many prominent members of the Assembly opposed the
inclusion of these provisions in the Constitution as they thought that they were
inconsistent with the democratic provisions embodied elsewhere. The majority
of the members, however, favored the inclusion of these provisions, although
reluctantly, as a precautionary measure, against possible disruptive forces
destroying the newly established Union.
The object of emergency provisions is to preserve the integrity of the
constitution itself. The purpose of concentration of power is for defending the
constitutional order and not its destruction. The constitution is in danger during
emergency. The emergency provisions provide the necessary flexibility to the
constitution for uniform action on all India basis during the times of crisis, and
protect it from breakdown. The country could function as a unitary state in
times of need. It enables the government to meet the problems of the law and
order and internal security successfully.
In the newly established democratic constitution where the roots of the popular
government have not gone deep and where the disruptive and fissiparous
tendencies are at work and where there is a constant fear of external aggression
due to imperialistic designs of big powers and international economic rivalries,
the emergency provisions can protect such states against all dangers. The
government have an unfailing weapon with them for crushing domestic
disturbances, caused by casteism, linguism, communalism, groupism and the
like.

Features
Each of the emergencies can be proclaimed only by the President of
India through the issue of a proclamation. The constitution also relies upon the
President to deliver the goods during the operation of Emergency. This seems to
be his role as the executive head of the State and a inter-state coordinator. While
the President is the proclaiming authority, Parliament determines the duration of
emergency. The State Governors enjoy no such powers. During emergency the
Government of the day should be prima facie trusted to act bonafidely in the
discharge of its responsibilities.
Judiciary is not given the power to proclaim emergency as it is concerned
only with the administration of justice in the state and not with political
questions. So the executive and the legislature are given this right. As regards
proclamation the executive enjoys special position. The resulting arrangement
normally takes the form of temporary increase in the powers of the executive.
The proclaiming authority is the head of the state- President, King or
Chairman as the case may be. In the Parliamentary democracies, it is exercised
by the head of the state or chief executive on the aid and advice of the Council
of Ministers. This is because the ultimate responsibility of maintenance of
peace and order of the country or any part thereof rests with the Federation. The
courts have no power to question the validity of such proclamation.
An emergency under Article 352 or Article 360 is national in character.
Though a proclamation can be issued when the President is satisfied, the
Constitution does not say as to how the President is to be satisfied and what is
the agency of his satisfaction.
Accumulation of power in one person for long is undesirable. Even the
proclamation of emergency and the measures taken by the executive require
immediate reporting to the legislature. Fixed time limit is always qualified by
the clauses for the time being, as soon as, etc.
The Constitution also does not provide for the contingency of the
Parliament disapproving the Proclamation. Parliament has three options before
it
It may approve the proclamation by a resolution.
It may take no action.
It may reject or disapprove the proclamation.


Proclamation of emergency is very serious matter as it disturbs the normal
fabric of the constitution and adversely affects the rights of the people. Such a
proclamation should therefore, be issued only in exceptional circumstances and
not merely to keep an unpopular government in office as happened in June 1975
when the emergency was declared on the ground of internal disturbance without
there being justification for the same. While defending the emergency
provisions in the Constituent Assembly, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar also accepted the
possibility of their misuse. He observed, I do not altogether deny that there is a
possibility of the Articles being abused or employed for political purposes.

OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY
To understand the implications of the declaration of Emergency, and
recognise the different kinds of Emergencies as provided for in the Indian
Constitution.

To identify the situations in which the President can proclaim a state of
National Emergency under Article 352.

To describe the circumstances in which the President can make a
proclamation under Article 356 imposing Presidents Rule in a state.

To recall that imposition of Presidents Rule has often been controversial in
the context of smooth Centre State relations.

To describe the circumstances under which Financial Emergency can be
proclaimed under Article 360.

To explain the role of the Parliament of India during all the three
emergencies.

To provide suggestions to prevent the misuse of the emergency powers

HYPOTHESIS
My aim is to proof whether the emergency provisions are subject to abuse
by the authorities of the I ndian government.
If yes, then what are the relevant safeguards to be followed to deter the
abuse of emergency powers provided under the Indian constitution?

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
The research methodology followed by me is purely doctrinal and does not involve
empirical approach. My research is based on the authoritative texts. The sources
for completion of this dissertation will be both primary and secondary. Primary to
the extent that the books will be referred. Data will be collected from judgements
and legislations. Secondary resources such as World Wide Web and articles
published therein will also be made use of.







CHAPTER 2
In the SECOND CHAPTER, I have discussed the Proclamation of National
Emergency under I ndian Constitution. A brief abstract has been given below.
Article 352 holds the provision for the National Emergency
The Constitution of India has provided for imposition of emergency caused by
war, external aggression or internal rebellion. This is described as the National
Emergency. This type of emergency can be declared by the President of India. It
is both in unitary and federal constitution.
The Constitution of India has provided for imposition of emergency caused by
war, external aggression or internal rebellion. This is described as the National
Emergency. This type of emergency can be declared by the President of India if
he is satisfied that the situation is very grave and the security of India or any
part thereof is threatened or is likely to be threatened either (i) by war or
external aggression or (ii) by armed rebellion within the country. The President
can issue such a proclamation even on the ground of threat of war or aggression.
According to the 44th Amendment of the Constitution, the President can declare
such an emergency only if the Cabinet recommends in writing to do so.
Such a proclamation of emergency has to be approved by both the Houses of
Parliament by absolute majority of the total membership of the Houses as well
as 2/3 majority of members present and voting within one month, otherwise the
proclamation ceases to operate.
In case the Lok Sabha stands dissolved at the time of proclamation of
emergency or is not in session, it has to be approved by the Rajya Sabha within
one month and later on by the Lok Sabha also within one month of the start of
its next session. Once approved by the Parliament, the emergency remains in
force for a period of six months from the date of proclamation. In case it is to be
extended beyond six months, another prior resolution has to be passed by the
Parliament. In this way, such emergency continues indefinitely. But if the
situation improves the emergency can be revoked by another proclamation by
the President of India.
The 44th Amendment of the Constitution provides that ten per cent or more
members of the Lok Sabha can requisition a meeting of the Lok Sabha and in
that meeting, it can disapprove or revoke the emergency by a simple majority.
In such a case emergency will immediately become inoperative.
National Emergency has been declared in our country three times so far. For the
first time, emergency was declared on 26 October 1962 after China attacked our
borders in the North East. This National Emergency lasted till 10 January 1968,
long after the hostilities ceased.
For the second time, it was declared on 3 December 1971 in the wake of the
second India-
Pakistan War and was lifted on 21 March 1977. While the second emergency,
on the basis of external aggression, was in operation, third National Emergency
(called internal emergency) was imposed on 25 June 1975. This emergency was
declared on the ground of internal disturbances. Internal disturbances justified
imposition of the emergency despite the fact that the government was already
armed with the powers provided during the second National Emergency of 1971
which was still in operation.
Effects of National Emergency
The declaration of National Emergency has far-reaching effects both on the
rights of individuals and the autonomy of the states in the following manner:
(i) The most significant effect is that the federal form of the Constitution
changes into unitary. The authority of the Centre increases and the Parliament
assumes the power to make laws for the entire country or any part thereof, even
in respect of subjects mentioned in the State List.
(ii) The President of India can issue directions to the states as to the manner in
which the executive power of the states is to be exercised.
(iii) During this period, the Lok Sabha can extend its tenure by a period of one
year at a time. But the same cannot be extended beyond six months after the
proclamation ceases to operate. The tenure of State Assemblies can also be
extended in the same manner.
(iv) During emergency, the President is empowered to modify the provisions
regarding distribution of revenues between the Union and the States.
(v) The Fundamental Rights under Article 19 about which you have already
learnt are automatically suspended and this suspension continues till the end of
the emergency.
But according to the 44th Amendment, Freedoms listed in Article 19 can be
suspended only in case of proclamation on the ground of war or external
aggression.
From the above discussion, it becomes quite clear that emergency not only
suspends the autonomy of the States but also converts the federal structure of India
into a unitary one. Still it is considered necessary as it equips the Union
Government with vast powers to cope up with the abnormal situations. The
exigencies of the situation prevailing in the period 1975-77 necessitated certain
changes in the Constitution regarding emergency provisions. Therefore, the 44th
amendment was passed on 30th April 1979 to strengthen the democratic features
of the Indian Constitution and to protect citizens rights even during the national
emergency.























CHAPTER 3
In the THIRD CHAPTER, I have discussed The Centres Duty To Protect The
States to outline the trajectory of legal thought and practice on the implications
of the duty of the Union stipulated under Art. 355.
Article 355 of the Constitution, one of the three important emergency
provisions and a less drastic one has never been used by any Central
Government so far. It enjoins on "the Union to protect every State against
external aggression, internal disturbances and to ensure that the Government of
every State is carried on in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution''.
Article 355 has not undergone any amendment. No change in it was suggested
by the Sarkaria Commission on Centre-State relations. The only point in the
Commission's recommendation that could have a bearing on its use is this one
It is entirely for the Union to decide, suo motu, whether the situation in a
State calls for deployment of the Central forces, though "it is desirable to
consult the State concerned, whenever feasible, before deploying its armed
forces, otherwise than at the request of the State''.
Internal disturbance may occur when-
a) One or more units of the federation want to secede from the Union;
b) one constituent state attacks another;
c) the people revolt against the government; or
d) General strike or subversive activities disturb the peace and order of the
country.
But internal disturbance may come within the purview of the State
Governments in the category of public order , not including the use of naval,
military or air force or any other armed forces of the Union in the aid of the
Civil Power. It was probably the intention of the framers to include use of naval,
military, air force or any other armed forces of the Union in aid of civil power
against internal rebellion. Thus, the significance of the words used in Article
352 may be appreciated by a reference to those used in Article 355. Further as
the Constitution is binding on the entire country in equal measure; the Union
might exercise the power of enforcing it on the States in dealing with cases of
domestic violence. What is internal disturbance and whether the Union should
intervene for the purpose and if so, when. All these matters are to be considered
and decided by the Union.
During the debates in the Constituent Assembly, B.R. Ambedkar, the then
Union Law Minister and the chief architect of the Constitution, based the
rationale of this provision on the need for Central action without resorting to
extreme steps like the imposition of the Central rule. He explained its purpose
thus: "It shall be the duty of the Union to protect every unit and also to maintain
the Constitution.'' His elaboration: "So far as such obligation is concerned, it
will be found that it is not our Constitution alone which is going to create this
duty and this obligation.
The rationale given by Dr. Ambedkar, for including Art. 355 in the Constitution
is along these lines: that the Constitution is a federal Constitution and thus the
States have been assigned sovereignty within their own field, as well as plenary
powers to secure peace, order and good government for themselves (barring the
provisions which permit the Union to override any legislation that may be
passed by the States); it is therefore necessary to provide that if any invasion is
made into the States domain, as is permitted by Art. 356, it is carried out in
virtue of an obligation which the Constitution imposes upon the Union, in the
absence of which such invasion would be a wanton, arbitrary, and unauthorised
act. Clearly, it is for this reason that Art. 355 has been placed specifically in
Part XVIII which is sets out Emergency Provisions.
In State of Rajasthan v. Union of India, Beg, C.J.I observed that the provisions
dealing with the proclamation of emergency under Art. 352, which would have
to be grave and immanent, would be covered by the first part of the duty of the
Union towards a State mentioned in Art. 355 viz. to protect the States from
external aggression and internal disturbances, and the second part of the duty,
viz. to ensure that the Government of every State is carried on in accordance
with the provisions of Constitution, is sought to be covered by a proclamation
under Art. 356.
The legal fallout of this position was that though Art. 355 creates a duty of the
Union towards the States, this duty was to be viewed as providing justification
for the employment of emergency action under Arts. 352 and 356, and thus not
contemplating any other action, in lieu of this duty.









CHAPTER 4

In the FOURTH CHAPTER I have tried to provide an insight to The
Imposition of the Presidents Rule Due to the Failure of the Constitutional
Machinery in a State
Article 356 says that it is the duty of the Union Government to ensure that
governance of a State is carried on in accordance with the provisions of the
Constitution. Under Article 356, the President may issue a proclamation to
impose emergency in a state if he is satisfied on receipt of a report from the
Governor of the State, or otherwise, that a situation has arisen under which the
Government of the State cannot be carried on smoothly. In such a situation,
proclamation of emergency by the President is called proclamation on account
of the failure (or breakdown) of constitutional machinery. In popular language
it is called the Presidents Rule.
Like National Emergency, such a proclamation must also be placed before both
the Houses of Parliament for approval. In this case approval must be given
within two months; otherwise the proclamation ceases to operate. If approved
by the Parliament, the proclamation remains valid for six months at a time. It
can be extended for another six months but not beyond one year. However,
emergency in a State can be extended beyond one year if
a National Emergency is already in operation; or if
the Election Commission certifies that the election to the State Assembly
cannot be held.
This type of emergency has been imposed in most of the States at one time or
the other for a number of times. It was in 1951 that this type of emergency was
imposed for the first time in the Punjab State. In 1957, the Kerala State was put
under the Presidents Rule.
There have been many cases of misuse of constitutional breakdown. For
example, in 1977 when Janata Party came into power at the Centre, the
Congress Party was almost wiped out in North Indian States. On this excuse,
Desai Government at the Centre dismissed nine State governments where
Congress was still in power. This action of Morarji Desais Janata Government
was strongly criticised by the Congress and others. But, when in 1980 (after
Janata Government had lost power) Congress came back to power at the Centre
under Mrs.Gandhis leadership and dismissed all the then Janata Party State
Governments. In both cases there was no failure of Constitutional machinery,
but actions were taken only on political grounds.
In 1986, emergency was imposed in Jammu and Kashmir due to terrorism and
insurgency. In all, there are more than hundred times that emergency has been
imposed in various States for one reason or the other. However, after 1995 the
use of this provision has rarely been made.
Effects of Imposition of Presidents Rule in a State
The declaration of emergency due to the breakdown of Constitutional
machinery in a State has the following effects:
The President can assume to himself all or any of the functions of the
State
Government or he may vest all or any of those functions with the
Governor or any other executive authority.
The President may dissolve the State Legislative Assembly or put it
under suspension.
He may authorise the Parliament to make laws on behalf of the State
Legislature.
The President can make any other incidental or consequential provision
necessary togive effect to the object of proclamation.
The way Presidents Rule was imposed on various occasions has raised many
questions.
At times the situation really demanded it. But at other times, Presidents Rule
was imposed purely on political grounds to topple the ministry formed by a
party different from the one at the Centre, even if that particular party enjoyed
majority in the Legislative Assembly. Suspending or dissolving assemblies and
not giving a chance to the other political parties to form governments in states
has been due to partisan consideration of the Union Government, for which
Article 356 has been clearly misused.
In view of the above facts, Article 356 has become very controversial. In spite
of the safeguards provided by the 44th Amendment Act, this provision has been
alleged to be misused by the Union Government. That is why, there is a demand
either for its deletion or making provision in the Constitution to restrict the
misuse of this Article. The Sarkaria Commission which was appointed to review
the CentreState relations also recommended that Article 356 should be used
only as a last resort. The Commission also suggested that the State Legislative
Assembly should not be dissolved unless the proclamation is approved by the
Parliament. It further suggested that all possibilities of forming an alternative
government should be fully explored before the Centre imposes emergency in a
State on grounds of breakdown of Constitutional machinery. The Supreme
Court held in the Bommai case that the Assembly may not be dissolved till the
Proclamation is approved by the Parliament. On a few occasions such as when
Gujral Government recommended use of Article 356 in Uttar Pradesh, the
President returned the recommendation for reconsideration. The Union
Government took the hint and dropped the proposal.

CHAPTER 5
In the FIFTH CHAPTER I have made an attempt to explain The Position of
the Fundamental Rights During Emergency.
Fundamental Rights are those basic conditions of social life without which a
citizen cannot be at his best self or those basic conditions which are very
essential for the good life of a citizen. In pre-constitutional India we didnt had
any concept of fundamental rights. We have borrowed the concept of
Fundamental Rights from U.S.A. which was the first country in the world, to
include a Bill of Rights in its constitution.
U.S.A. was the first country in the world to make a provision for the Bill of
Rights for its citizens. The Fundamental Rights are contained in Part III of the
Constitution. The Fundamental Rights contain twenty four Articles from Article
12 to 35.
The most striking features of the emergency provisions of the Indian
constitution is the power conferred upon President to suspend by Order the right
to move any court for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights conferred by
articles of the Constitution specified in the Order. Among the various powers
conferred upon the Executive, the power to bar access to the courts is the power
which has the most direct impact upon the lives of ordinary citizen. During the
operation of the Proclamation of Emergency, the power to suspend the
enforcement of the Fundamental Rights has been regularly invoked.
Our constitution contains provisions for suspension of Fundamental rights under
Articles 358 and 359. Under Article 358, on a declaration of emergency, the
fundamental rights guaranteed by Article 19 stand suspended. Furthermore
Article 359 of the Constitution, as originally enacted, provided that when a
Proclamation of Emergency was in operation, the enforcement of any
fundamental right may be suspended by the issue of a Presidential Order. In
other words, Article 358 deals with suspension of Fundamental rights under
article 19 and Article 359 deals with suspension with other fundamental rights.
The conferral of such extraordinary powers on the Executive by Article 359 of
the Indian Constitution had created misgivings in the mind of some of the
Constitution- makers. But in the course of debates of Draft Article 280 (which
became Article 359), Dr Ambedkar, Chairman of the Drafting Committee of the
Constituent Assembly, that the Committee had adopted the precedent of United
States of America by vesting Parliament with the matter, and giving an ad
interim power to the Executive. He went on to point out that in India a further
safeguard was guaranteed by the fact that the Executive would be subjected to
the authority of the Parliament. The fears expressed about these provisions were
in his opinion groundless, and there were ample provisions for the ample
exercise of inadequate parliamentary control.
It may be true that the suspensive power embodied in Article 359 has been
directly inspired by the provision in the United States Constitution which
condones the suspension of writ of Habeas Corpus in times of war or
insurrection. But the important thing to note is that the Indian Constitution did
not expressly suspend this particular remedy, but appeared to suspend the
process of the courts in relation to a specific category of substantive right. It
should also be noted that in contrast to the factual circumstances which the
Constitution of India postulates with respect to the issue of Proclamation of
Emergency, the exercise of extraordinary power to suspend the process of the
courts is subject only to the condition that there be a Proclamation of
Emergency in force. There are no words of limitation to suggest that either the
power to suspend the enforcement of Fundamental Rights or the effect of such
suspension is confined to matters having a nexus with the purposes of
Emergency.
















CHAPTER 6
In the SIXTH CHAPTER I have provided an explanation for The Financial
Emergency under the Indian Constitution.
The third type of Emergency is Financial Emergency provided under Article
360 of the Indian Constitution
If the President is satisfied that there is an economic situation in which the
financial stability or credit of India is threatened, he or she can declare financial
emergency. Like the other two types of emergencies, it has also to be approved
by the Parliament. It must be approved by both Houses of Parliament within two
months. Financial Emergency can operate as long as the situation demands and
may be revoked by a subsequent proclamation. In case of a financial
emergency, the President can reduce the salaries of all government officials,
including judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts. All money bills passed
by the State legislatures are submitted to the President for his approval. He can
direct the state to observe certain principles (economy measures) relating to
financial matters. The phrase Emergency period used loosely, when referring to
the political history of India, often refers to the third and the most controversial
of the three occasions. But fundamental rights cannot be suspended.












CHAPTER 7
In the SEVENTH CHAPTER, I have summarised my Conclusion and
Suggestions based on my studies described in earlier chapters. Here I have
given a capsule of the critical analysis of the use of emergency powers under the
Indian Constitution and also the ways of preventing the abuse of the emergency
powers.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

PROFESSOR M.P JAIN, Indian Constitutional Law, Sixth Edition Reprint 2012
BRIJ KISHORE SHARMA, Introduction to the Constitution of India
IMTIAZ OMAR, Emergency Powers and the Courts in India and Pakistan
SUBHASH CHANDER ARORA, Current Issues and Trends in Centre-state
Relations: A Global View
B. C. DAS, Emergency Provisions in the Indian Constitution: A study in
comparative analysis, INDIAN JOURNAL OF POLITICAL SCIENCE
(www.jstor.org)