Supreme Court Reserves Verdict In Presidential Reference On Timelines For Bills' Assent

Last Updated:September 11, 2025, 14:27 IST

The SC reserved verdict on President Murmu's Article 143 reference about time limits for President and Governors to assent to bills, after hearing states and Union arguments.

A five-judge constitution bench of Supreme Court concluded the hearing. (Image: PTI/File)

The Supreme Court on Thursday reserved its verdict in the reference made by President Droupadi Murmu under Article 143, concerning the time limits for the President and state governors to grant assent to legislative bills under Articles 200 and 201 of the Constitution.

A bench comprising Chief Justice of India BR Gavai, Justice Surya Kant, Justice Vikram Nath, Justice PS Narasimha and Justice AS Chandurkar heard the matter for ten days, according to a report in Live Law.

The reference, made in May, followed a two-judge bench decision in the Tamil Nadu Governor RN Ravi’s case, which addressed delays by constitutional authorities in acting on bills passed by state legislatures.

The current hearing focused not on reviewing that verdict but on answering broader constitutional questions, as clarified by the bench multiple times.

States like Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Punjab, and West Bengal questioned the necessity of the reference, arguing that the earlier judgment had already addressed these issues. However, the Court explored whether Governors could indefinitely delay assent without returning bills, warning that such power could undermine the authority of elected governments.

Attorney General R. Venkataramani and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Union government, opposed fixed timelines. They argued that the Constitution grants discretion to the President and Governors, and judicially imposing deadlines could breach the separation of powers.

On the other hand, senior advocates including Kapil Sibal (for the State of West Bengal), Dr. A.M. Singhvi ( for Tamil Nadu), K.K. Venugopal (for Kerala), and Gopal Subramanium (for Karnataka) supported time-bound actions, stating that delays damage federal principles and legislative functioning.

Senior Advocate Harish Salve (for State of Maharashtra), Senior Advocate Mahesh Jethmalani (for State of Chhattisgarh) etc, argued in support of the Union’s position.

News Desk

The News Desk is a team of passionate editors and writers who break and analyse the most important events unfolding in India and abroad. From live updates to exclusive reports to in-depth explainers, the Desk d...Read More

The News Desk is a team of passionate editors and writers who break and analyse the most important events unfolding in India and abroad. From live updates to exclusive reports to in-depth explainers, the Desk d...

Read More

News india Supreme Court Reserves Verdict In Presidential Reference On Timelines For Bills' Assent

Read More