Demonetisation was 'unlawful' — what the dissenting Justice BV Nagarathna said

: Demonetisation is done and dusted: SC post-facto review is awaited and likely to shed more heat than light

However, by releasing Rs 2,000 notes, the Centre might not have achieved its objective of curbing black money and corruption in India.

"The act of demonetisation is vitiated," the justice added.

Calling the decision “an exercise of power, contrary to law," she said the currency ban could have been carried out through an act of Parliament, not by the government.

"In my view, the power of the central government being vast has to be exercised through a plenary legislation rather than by an executive act by issuance of notification. It is necessary that Parliament, which consists of the representatives of the people of the country, discusses the matter and thereafter, approves the matter," she said.

Justice Gavai's judgement also doesn't take into consideration the fact that only the Central Board of the Reserve Bank of India can recommend demonetisation, Justice Nagarathna said.

"When the proposal for demonetisation comes from Centre, it has to come by way of legislation or at least ordinance. Without Parliament, democracy cannot survive," she said.

The justice claims that there was no application of mind by the Reserve Bank of India and that the decision was made within 24 hours, allowing them no time to apply their mind.

She added, "Serious ramifications of the move required for the issue to be laid before RBI for consideration."

She also questioned whether the RBI had properly considered the social economic hardships of demonetisation.

"Parliament, which is the centre of democracy, cannot be left aloof in a matter of such critical importance," she said.