Overview

• Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said Article 32 petitions by states against the President or Governors are not maintainable and sought the Court’s view on the scope of Article 361 immunity.
• The bench asked whether it should remain powerless if assent is withheld for years and pressed counsel on the potential to stall even money bills.
• Counsel for several BJP-ruled states argued that only the Governor or President can grant assent, that no timelines exist in the Constitution, and that courts cannot create 'deemed assent.'
• Chief Justice B. R. Gavai cited the S. R. Bommai precedent on reviewing Article 356 to question why discretion under Article 200 should be beyond judicial scrutiny.
• The hearings continue on the Presidential Reference, with Tamil Nadu and Kerala slated to defend the April 8 ruling that set deadlines and treated long-pending bills as assented.