Article 196 of the Costitution of India with Case law
Article 196 of the Constitution of India
Title: Introduction and passing of Bills
Bare Text of Article 196:
(1) Subject to the provisions of Articles 198 and 207 with respect to Money Bills and other Financial Bills, a Bill may originate in either House of the Legislature of a State where the Legislature consists of two Houses.
(2) A Bill shall not be deemed to have been passed by the Houses of the Legislature of a State unless it has been agreed to by both Houses, either without amendment or with such amendments only as are agreed to by both Houses.
(3) A Bill pending in the Legislature of a State shall not lapse by reason of the prorogation of the House or Houses thereof.
(4) A Bill pending in the Legislative Council of a State which has not been passed by the Legislative Assembly shall not lapse on a dissolution of the Assembly.
Explanation:
Article 196 outlines the procedure for introduction and passage of Bills in State Legislatures, particularly in States having a bicameral legislature (i.e., with both Legislative Assembly and Legislative Council).
Key Provisions & Their Meaning:
| Clause | Provision | Explanation |
|---|---|---|
| (1) | Bill may originate in either House | Applicable in bicameral States (e.g., Uttar Pradesh, Maharashtra) |
| (2) | Bill must be passed by both Houses | Unless it's a Money Bill, both Houses must agree on the Bill |
| (3) | Bill doesn't lapse on prorogation | Ensures continuity of legislative business |
| (4) | Bill in Council doesn’t lapse on dissolution of Assembly | But a Bill in Assembly does lapse upon dissolution |
Case Laws on Article 196 & Legislative Procedure:
1. Purushothaman Nambudiri v. State of Kerala, AIR 1962 SC 694
Principle: The Supreme Court held that procedural requirements under Articles 196–198 are mandatory, especially for Money Bills, and any deviation can render the Bill unconstitutional.
2. Shankari Prasad v. Union of India, AIR 1951 SC 458
Though mainly related to constitutional amendments, the Court acknowledged the importance of bicameral legislative procedure and validated the application of legislative steps under Articles like 196.
3. K. Nagaraj v. State of Andhra Pradesh, (1985) 1 SCC 523
The Supreme Court examined the validity of legislative processes in the context of abolishing the Legislative Council. It reinforced that Article 196 and related provisions must be complied with when Bills are passed in bicameral States.
4. Nabam Rebia v. Deputy Speaker, Arunachal Pradesh Legislative Assembly, (2016) 8 SCC 1
While primarily dealing with disqualification and Speaker's powers, the judgment discusses the validity of legislative procedures and highlights how violation of Articles like 196 can vitiate the law-making process.
Conclusion:
Article 196 ensures that the State legislative process is democratic, deliberate, and constitutionally sound, especially in bicameral legislatures. It reflects the importance of legislative scrutiny and continuity of business, even across prorogation or dissolution.
RELATED Blog
0 comments