Question: Do you think that constitution of India does not accept principle of strict separation of powers rather it is based on the principle of ‘checks and balance’?
Answer: The constitution of India is designed in such a way that some branches are overlapping without causing significant problems but others have been exclusively separated to maintain its sanctity.
Strict separation of powers
The Indian constitution has kept judiciary separate from other branches such as legislative and executive. This has been done to maintain the neutrality that judicial officials are expected to maintain. There is very little participation of this branch in decision making except acting as a watchdog on other two branches.
Overlapping of branches
- Legislative and Executive
Legislative and executive in India act as complementary to each other in carrying out their duties. The members of legislature take part in decision making through government formation. This has been done to make representatives the decision makers.
This is different from other countries such as USA, where legislature and executive are separate entities and public representatives do not take part in governance of the state.
Checks and balances imposed
The executive is responsible to legislature for their actions. This has been done to prevent executive from overstepping from their jurisdiction.
Ex: Parliamentary committees.
- Validity of legislation
The judiciary carefully monitors the actions taken by the other two branches. If they are found to be illegal, they are stuck down.
Ex: Validity of Constitutional amendments.
This form of governance is better as it creates responsibility on each streams to carry out their functions in an efficient manner.
Thus, the form of checks and balances has indeed been better suited for Indian adoption as it has made each branch to be responsible towards public.