One Supreme Court judge dissented from the overall verdict on demonetisation on Monday, calling the act “unlawful” and “vitiated”.
The Supreme Court passed the verdict on the note ban today, where four out of the total five SC judges decided to uphold the demonetisation order passed by the Bhartiya Janta Party-led Centre over six years ago, which banned notes of several currencies.
Supreme Court judge Justice B V Nagarathna was the only dissenting judge on the apex court bench, who termed the demonetisation move by the Centre as “unlawful and vitiated”. Further, she also said that demonetisation was a well-intentioned practice, aimed at eradicating black money from the country.
In her dissenting verdict on the demonetisation issue, Justice Nagarathna said it is beyond the pale of doubt that the demonetisation measure, which was aimed at eliminating such "depraved practices", was well-intentioned.
However, Justice Nagarathna said she wished to differ on the reasoning and conclusions arrived at in the majority judgment with regard to the exercise of power by the Centre under sub-section (2) of section 26 of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934 by the issuance of the November 8, 2016 notification.
During the Supreme Court hearing on demonetisation, the SC justice said, “In view of the aforesaid conclusions, I am of the considered view that the impugned notification dated November 8, 2016, issued under sub-section (2) of section 26 of the Act is unlawful. In the circumstances, the action of demonetisation of all currency notes of Rs 500 and Rs 1,000 is vitiated.”
The order of note ban and demonetisation has only been termed as unlawful only because of the legal analysis of the act, and the provisions of the RBI Act attached to it, and not because of its reasoning and intentions, Justice Nagarathna said.
"Therefore, it cannot be denied that demonetisation in the instant case was a well-intentioned proposal. However, in my separate opinion I shall proceed to legalistically examine whether demonetisation, as well-intentioned as it may have been, was carried out in accordance with the procedure established under law," she said.
(With PTI inputs)
READ | Bomb found near Punjab CM Bhagwant Mann's house in Chandigarh
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
 "‘Note ban was an unlawful act’: What dissenting Supreme Court judge said during demonetisation verdict")
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}