Doctrine of Eclipse

 What is the doctrine of eclipse? Can it be applied to a post Constitutional law? Discuss with the aid of case-law.

Write note on doctrine of eclipse.

What do you mean by doctrine of eclipse? Discuss also the case laws on the subject.

As per the Doctrine of Eclipse, any law inconsistent with fundamental rights is not totally void but that is overshadowed by the fundamental rights and after removing that inconsistency (vanishing eclipse) the entire law becomes valid.

In other words, a law which violates fundamental rights is not void ab initio but is only unenforceable in the court of law. It is over-shadowed by the fundamental rights and remains dormant.

This doctrine is related with Article 13(1) of the Constitution of India and it was evolved by the Supreme Court in the case of Bhikaji Narain Dhakras v. State of M.P., 1955 SCR (2)589.

Supreme Court of India in Deep Chand v. State of Uttar Pradesh, 1959 SCR Supl. (2)8 observed that there is no scope for applying the doctrine of eclipse to a case where the law is void ab initio in whole or in part.

Supreme Court of India in P. Ratinam v. Union of India, 1994 SCC (3) 394 held Section 309 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 unconstitutional. Hence, the section was under eclipse. However, a constitutional bench in Gian Kaur v. State of Punjab, 1996 SCC (2) 648 reversed this decision and held section 309 as constitutional whereby the eclipse was removed and it became operational again.

The doctrine of eclipse can be invoked only in the case of a law valid when made but a shadow is cast on it by supervening constitutional inconsistency or supervening existing statutory inconsistency; when the shadow is removed the impugned Act is freed from all blemishes or infirmity.