(AI image) NEW DELHI: Supreme Court has said constitutional courts must be careful in exercising judicial review of laws so as not to create an anti-investment atmosphere and should weigh national interest against hypothetical fears about legislation.A bench of CJI Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi made these oral observations on Friday during preliminary hearing on a PIL by E A S Sarma, whose counsel Prashant Bhushan faulted the liability fastened on private players operating nuclear power plants under the Sustainable Harnessing and Advancing of Nuclear Energy for Transforming India (SHANTI) Act passed by Parliament in Dec. Bhushan said the private players’ liability is capped at 3,000 crore even though a nuclear plant accident could cause damage running into lakhs of crores of rupees and cited the Chernobyl and Fukushima nuclear disasters. The govt has allowed private players in the nuclear sector but absolves them of strict civil liability clauses, he said, adding that the govt’s liability is also capped at 4,500 crore.CJI Kant said, “There must be an atmosphere in the country where investors feel encouraged to invest.” Regulations must sync with other countries, says SC CJI Kant said, “Today, coal-based power plants are not encouraged. We cannot do without nuclear energy. So, there must be a balance in the approach – national interest vs hypothetical fears.” “We should not create an atmosphere where people will fear to invest in India because courts here interfere in everything. The litigation drags on and the projects become unviable despite huge investments.”Justice Bagchi said, “These are policy decisions – what should be our energy basket. Whether the policy suffers bias or is unconstitutional could be determined on scrutiny.””Show us the regulatory framework on civil liability in countries like the USA, Europe and Japan. When electricity is traded across borders, the regulatory framework in India must be compatible with those in other countries,” he said.Senior advocate Kapil Sibal attempted to interject in support of Bhushan, but the bench stopped him saying “let Bhushan assist us.” The bench asked Bhushan to give details of the regulatory framework on civil nuclear liability regimes in other countries and adjourned the hearing to next month.End of ArticleFollow Us On Social MediaVideosThree Fault Lines, One Open War: Security Expert Breaks Down Why Pakistan’s Taliban Gamble FailedPak-Afghan War: Security Expert Say Conflict Could End Badly for IslambadWho Is Really Running Pakistan’s Afghan Policy? Experts React To Islamabad’s AggressionIndia, Israel Backs Kabul: Pak Journalist’s Shocking Claims on Afghan Actions Against IslamabadAmid Rising Violence, Afghanistan Urges Pakistan For Talks To Prevent Prolonged Conflict“Deep Concern”: China Alarms As Pakistan-Afghanistan Clash Explodes After Taliban StrikeKejriwal Gets Clean Chit In Delhi Liquor Policy Case, Court Tears Into CBI Over Lack Of EvidencePakistan Army Blames India Again For ‘Open War’ Against Afghanistan, Calls Taliban Delhi’s ProxyCanada PM Mark Carney Lands In India, Aims For Fresh Push To Reset Strained Bilateral TiesPakistan in Open War With Afghanistan, But Does Islamabad Have the Military Muscle?123PhotostoriesThe most powerful mantra to remove fear and anxietyFrom Thalapathy Vijay to Dhanush: South Indian celebrity divorces that shocked fansThe 50: From Yuvika Chaudhary getting upset with Mr Faisu to Sidharth Bharadwaj’s eviction; Top moments from the episode5 plants you should NEVER place near the main door as per Vastu and why3-ingredient breakfast dishes for working women and what makes them specialDitch the pastel winds: What Vijay Deverakonda’s and Rashmika Mandanna’s wedding outfits taught us3 office rules you should always follow for a peaceful life and better work-life balance6 Indian billionaires who own private residence worth crores in Lutyens’ Bungalow Zone, DelhiFrom red anarkali to yellow suit: Rashmika Mandanna’s newlywed glow steals the spotlight10 Bihari Sattu dishes that are good for gut health and overall nutrition123Hot PicksPakistan-Afghanistan warIndia GDP growthGold rate todayAir ticket refund rulesIncome Tax CalculatorPublic holidays February 2026Bank Holidays februaryTop TrendingResident Evil RequiemDenver BroncosNFL RumorsHSR Stellaron Hunter Blade skinLos Angeles DodgersCody BellingerTony DungyShai Gilgeous AlexanderNFL CombineTony Dungy
NEW DELHI: Supreme Court has said constitutional courts must be careful in exercising judicial review of laws so as not to create an anti-investment atmosphere and should weigh national interest against hypothetical fears about legislation.A bench of CJI Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi made these oral observations on Friday during preliminary hearing on a PIL by E A S Sarma, whose counsel Prashant Bhushan faulted the liability fastened on private players operating nuclear power plants under the Sustainable Harnessing and Advancing of Nuclear Energy for Transforming India (SHANTI) Act passed by Parliament in Dec. Bhushan said the private players’ liability is capped at 3,000 crore even though a nuclear plant accident could cause damage running into lakhs of crores of rupees and cited the Chernobyl and Fukushima nuclear disasters. The govt has allowed private players in the nuclear sector but absolves them of strict civil liability clauses, he said, adding that the govt’s liability is also capped at 4,500 crore.CJI Kant said, “There must be an atmosphere in the country where investors feel encouraged to invest.” Regulations must sync with other countries, says SC CJI Kant said, “Today, coal-based power plants are not encouraged. We cannot do without nuclear energy. So, there must be a balance in the approach – national interest vs hypothetical fears.” “We should not create an atmosphere where people will fear to invest in India because courts here interfere in everything. The litigation drags on and the projects become unviable despite huge investments.”Justice Bagchi said, “These are policy decisions – what should be our energy basket. Whether the policy suffers bias or is unconstitutional could be determined on scrutiny.”“Show us the regulatory framework on civil liability in countries like the USA, Europe and Japan. When electricity is traded across borders, the regulatory framework in India must be compatible with those in other countries,” he said.Senior advocate Kapil Sibal attempted to interject in support of Bhushan, but the bench stopped him saying “let Bhushan assist us.” The bench asked Bhushan to give details of the regulatory framework on civil nuclear liability regimes in other countries and adjourned the hearing to next month.
