No, the Supreme Court of India cannot make laws in the legislative sense, but it can lay down law through its judgments, which becomes binding precedent under Article 141 of the Constitution. Here’s how it works: Law-Making Power: Only the Parliament and State Legislatures have the power to make laws under the Constitution (Articles 245–246). Judicial Interpretation: The Supreme Court interprets laws and the Constitution. Its interpretation becomes binding on all lower courts and authorities. Article 141 – Binding Precedent: “The law declared by the Supreme Court shall be binding on all courts within the territory of India.” This means its decisions carry the force of law, even if not enacted by the legislature. Filling Legislative Gaps: In the absence of legislation, the Court may lay down guidelines (e.g., Vishaka Guidelines for sexual harassment at the workplace) that act as law until Parliament makes a law. Conclusion: The Supreme Court does not “make laws” like the legislature, but it creates binding legal principles through interpretation, which function like law unless overruled or replaced by legislation.

Dear Client, The Supreme Court of India cannot enact laws in the manner in which Parliament or State Legislatures can. Making of laws is a legislative role, and according to the Constitution of India, this role has been entrusted in the hands of the peoples' elected representatives. The main role of the Supreme Court is to interpret the Constitution and also the legislations enacted by the legislature. It guarantees that such laws are enforced in line with constitutional standards. Nevertheless, by its rulings, the Supreme Court frequently formulates binding legal maxims and meanings. By Article 141 of the Constitution, the law announced by the Supreme Court is binding on all Indian courts. That is, the Court's interpretations of legislations and provisions of the constitution become precedent and are regarded as authoritative law by courts. In such a manner, while the Court does not enact laws, its rulings can end up having a similar consequence. In some cases where there is a vacuum in law—when there is no law on a specific matter—the Court can give guidelines or directions that are only temporary to bridge the gap before the legislature passes a law.One notable case is the case of Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan, in which the Supreme Court issued guidelines regarding sexual harassment at work, which lasted until the Parliament enacted the Prevention of Sexual Harassment (POSH) Act in 2013. Accordingly, although the Supreme Court cannot technically legislate, its decisions tend to define the law and affect policy via interpretation, judicial activism, and issuance of binding directives in exceptional circumstances. I hope this answer helps. In case of future queries, please feel free to contact us. Thank you.