“Constitutions are intended to preserve practical and substantial rights, not to maintain theories.”
– Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr in DAVIS v. MILLS (1904)
India does not follow a strict separation of powers in its Constitution. Except for Article 50, which says the judiciary should be separate from the executive, there is no clear rule dividing powers between the branches of government. The Constitution of India allows overlap. It does not give legislative or judicial power to any specific organ in a fixed way.
However, despite this flexibility, each branch has its own main role and one is not supposed to take over another’s job. During the Constituent Assembly debates, Kengal Hanumanthaiah disagreed with KT Shah’s proposal for a presidential system which brought along with itself a formulation of a strictly defined separation of power.
Hanumanthaiah said the Constitution supports a parliamentary system, which fits India better. He believed full separation would lead to clashes between the three branches, which would hurt the country. He said it is better to aim for balance and not conflict.
