AND THE LORD SAID UNTO— 21
Court has only such powers as once belonged to the Supreme Court. To know the powers of High Court one must know the powers of the Supreme Court. Sir John Grant, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court was driven to make the application to the Privy Council which became the subject matter of the decision because the Government of Bombay refused to execute his writs. Although the general question– whether the law should provide that the Executive shall be bound to carry out the orders of the Judiciary was not a question directly in issue yet there could hardly be a question of greater importance from the standpoint of the general public. In any Political Constitution the Judiciary is the weakest organ as compared to the Legislature and the Executive. It depends upon the Legislature for the powers it possesses and upon the Executive for the carrying out of its orders. The Executive generally respects the orders of the Judiciary and carries them out. It is true that in the case reported, the Judiciary had no authority to issue a Writ and, therefore, the Executive was justified in refusing to carry it out. But an occasion may arise where an Executive out of spite or out of contumacy refuses to execute the Writ of the Judiciary. Should that happen Justice will remain hung up in the air and a grave public question might arise involving menace to the life, liberty and property of the citizen. These observations are suggested by reason of the contrast which one finds between the provisions in the New Government of India Act, of 1935 relating to the obligation of the Executive to carry out the Writs of the Federal Court or the High Court and analogous provisions in the Constitution of the United States and the erstwhile German Republic which served as an interlude between the fall of the Kaiser and the rise of Hitler. It would certainly be a profitable study to pursue this matter and the curious will naturally do so.
(See overleaf the Judgment referred above)