"[A]s soon as possible” v. “[R]easonable period”

                                                   "[A]s soon as possible” v. “[R]easonable period”

I am not even a legal sparrow, yet I dare to discuss the two phrases mentioned in the heading of the post.

Why did the five-judge Bench of the Supreme Court not use the phrase “as soon as possible” in its response to the Presidential Reference in its November 20th “judgement” as reported in the newspaper, probably on August 21, 2025 [the word judgement is within quotes as the question whether a Presidential Reference seeks a “judgement” or merely an opinion is not addressed] against its own earlier judgement on April 8th, 2025. The phrase used is, “reasonable period”. 

If the recent pronouncement from the five-judge Bench is a judgement, the judgement of April 8th can be appealed, I understand as a layman. If it addresses merely a Presidential Reference, the judgement of April 8th cannot be overruled, the then CJI quoted in the newspaper article.

My question pertains to the subsequent statement of the CJI in the same space. “[W]e can observe that the law as laid down in a particular manner [in a judgement] is not correct.” Then, an observation from the Bench is not equivalent to a judgement! Then, how can the incorrect judgement as stated by the five-judge Bench be appealed against? The Bench’s error would have become the law of the land. “It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is” – In Marbury v. Madison (US Supreme Court). In layman’s terms, the law is what the Supreme Court says the law is!

However, on this issue the Supreme Court of India has said two opposite things. OK, if you say a five-judge Bench overrules the earlier verdict, I would say a judgement overrules a response to a Presidential Reference. The classic “Which came first, the fruit or the seeds?”  

The matter has not been argued to the end. Coming back to the original question, why did the response to the Presidential Reference use an alternative phrase, “reasonable time.” Are these two phrases synonyms or not? If they are not, the April 8th judgement stands. If not, can it not be appealed?

Are you not opening a box of Pandoras?

All said, the issue is not closed. This is the story of Indian jurisprudence, it appears to this layman. I would accept a definitive clarification.

This sparrow can at best fly between trees and not soar in clear sky like an eagle does.

Raghuram Ekambaram