'Demonetisation good way of converting black money, I thought': Justice BV Nagarathna

Justice BV Nagarathna who gave a dissenting opinion in the Supreme Court's verdict on demonetisation on Saturday said she had done that because the common man's predicament due to demonetisation stirred her. Delivering an address at NALSAR University, Justice Nagarathna said if 98% of the currency found its way to the Reserve Bank of India, then the effectiveness of it in flushing out unaccounted wealth became questionable, LiveLaw reported.

"98% of the currency came back to the RBI. So where were we heading towards black money eradication? I thought it was a good way of converting black money into white money. What happened about income tax proceedings thereafter, we don't know. So, therefore, the common man's predicament really stirred me and hence I had to dissent," she said.

In 2023, the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court led by Justice Abdul Nazeer upheld the validity of the demonetisation scheme by a 4:1 majority. Justice Nagarathna, in her dissenting opinion, said that there was no independent application of mind by the Reserve Bank of India and the entire exercise was carried out in 24 hours.

‘Governors getting involved in litigation not healthy trend’

In her address, Justice Nagarathna also commented on the frequent legal tussles between state governments and the governors. "This is not a healthy trend under the Constitution to bring what the Governor does before constitutional courts for consideration. Though it is called a gubernatorial post, it is a serious constitutional post, and Governors must act as per the Constitution so that this kind of litigation reduces. It is quite embarrassing for Governors to be told to do or not to do a thing. The time has come where they would be now told, I suppose, to do their duties as per the Constitution," the Justice said. Such state versus Governor litigations were seen in Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Telangana and Punjab.