Mentors Comment:

The thinking line of the answer would be: The principle of separation of powers deals with the mutual relations among the three organs of the government, namely legislature, executive and judiciary. The principle implies that each organ should be independent of the other and that no organ should perform functions that belong to the Other. It signifies the fact that one person or body of persons should not exercise all the three powers of the government, as concentration of power in one person or a group of persons results in tyranny. Thus, there is a need for vesting the governmental power in three different organs

Answer:
Understanding that a government’s role is to protect individual rights, but acknowledging that governments have historically been the major violators of these rights, many measures have been devised to reduce this likelihood. The concept of Separation of Powers is one such measure. The premise behind the Separation of Powers is that when a single person or group has a large amount of power, they can become dangerous to citizens.The Separation of Power is a method of removing the amount of power in any group’s hands, making it more difficult to abuse.

Separation of power in Indian Constitution
In India, the separation of powers theory has been used as a guiding philosophy to separate powers as much as possible but not completely, so that the organs of government are alienated from each other. In our parliamentary form of governance, a lot of cooperation is required and thus each organ must correspond to the other on some level to function smoothly.

While the Indian Constitution has not indeed recognized the doctrine of separation of powers explicitly in its absolute rigidity, the functions of the different parts or branches of the government have been sufficiently differentiated. It is important to note that the separation of powers is still an important guiding principle of the constitution.

Most noteworthy is our judicial system which is completely independent from the executive and the legislature. According to Articles, 32, 136, 226 and 227, the High Courts and Supreme Courts have the power of judicial review which empowers them to declare any law passed by the parliament unconstitutional if it so decides. As regarding the judges, they are extremely well protected by the Constitution, their conduct is not open to discussion in the Parliament and their appointment can only be made by the President in consultation with the Chief Justice of India and the judges of the Supreme court.

India, not only there is functional overlapping but there are personnel overlapping also. The executive can affect the functioning of the judiciary by making appointments to the office of Chief Justice and other judges, among many other such cases of overlapping.

In I.C.Golak Nath v. State of Punjab, it was observed: “The Constitution brings into existence different constitutional entities, namely, the Union, the States and the Union Territories. It creates three major instruments of power, namely, the Legislature, the Executive and the Judiciary. It demarcates their jurisdiction minutely and expects them to exercise their respective powers without overstepping their limits. They should function within the spheres allotted to them.

In Indira Nehru Gandhi v. Raj Narain, it was observed: “That in the Indian Constitution there is separation of powers in a broad sense only. A rigid separation of powers as under the American Constitution or under the Australian Constitution does not apply to India. The SC also observed that the political usefulness of doctrine of Separation of Power is not widely recognized. No constitution can survive without a conscious adherence to its fine check and balance. The principle of Separation of Power is a principle of restraint which has in it the precept, innate in the prudence of self-preservation, that discretion is the better part of valor.”

Thus, the Indian Constitution, which is an extremely carefully planned document designed to uphold the integrity and liberty of every citizen, has not in its entirety embraced the doctrine of separation of powers but has indeed drawn a lot from the concept and kept it as a guiding principle. But the doctrine of Separation of Powers has been included in our basic structure doctrine as has been ruled and upheld by the Supreme Court in many cases. Thus, it holds a position of utmost importance, albeit has been modified to suit the needs of a modern all-pervasive state.