Opposing the Indian Independence Act, Winston Churchill described the Indian political leaders as rogues, rascals and freebooters. Dr Johnson, the great lexicographer had observed that patriotism was the last refuge of a scoundrel. On a historic occasion of Everest nationalism, our legislatures have a rare opportunity like the imminent presidential election to demonstrate that these two statements do not apply to India where politics is exercised by statesmen with wisdom and concern for the welfare of Indian humanity.
There are three different systems of democracy. The US system is where the President matters most and the Congress cannot, except by impeachment, override his powers which are large. The Swiss system is where cantons are territorial subdivisions with state power and are elected. They discharge governmental function and differ from the third pattern which is the Westminster system prevalent in the United Kingdom where the parties with parliamentary majority rule with the Cabinet enjoying powers of administration and have a formal head of the nation like the queen. The judiciary, the executive and the legislature are the trinity of sovereign instrumentalities in the Westminster pattern which our founding fathers adopted in the Indian Constitution.
The President of our republic is the symbol of the nation but has no functions of administration save, by virtue of a ruling of the Supreme Court, the determination of the age of a judge. He governs through the council of ministers and lives with pomp in a palace. But he is far more than a glorious figurehead. In Shamsher Singh’s case, where I wrote the leading opinion, the Court held: “The President in India is not at all a glorified cipher. He represents the majesty of the state, is at the apex, though only symbolically, and has rapport with the people and parties, being above politics. His vigilant presence makes for good government if only he uses, what Bagehot described as the right to be consulted, to warn and encourage. There is no doubt that the imprint of his personality may chasten and correct the political government, although the actual exercise of the functions entrusted to him by law is in effect and in law carried on by his duly appointed mentors, i e, the Prime Minister and his colleagues.”
The signature of the Rashtrapati is not only solemn and sublime and his unique jurisdiction to choose and dismiss the Prime Minister subject, of course, to established principles of presidential jurisprudence is a rare dimension of constitutional power. The right to advise the Cabinet and the power to claim to strategic information from Government are impregnable. Equally significant, he can address Parliament and influence it in its paramount function of national inquest-not arbitrarily but in conformity with Cabinet approval. 
Once when I was a presidential candidate (with disastrous defeat in the offing), I told the press that when Kumbakonam (big fraud) swindles the nation the President cannot be a Kumbhakarna (slumbering instrument). What I mean is that the Rashtrapati is a Himalayan presence and personality.  In this context, let me quote, what I recently wrote: “So my patriotic vision of the presidency is that whoever wins the seat, India, that is Bharat, shall not lose.  An unworthy victory shall not mar the majesty and magnificence of the first citizen of India. This is the challenge to the conscience of the legislators whose sacred suffrage solemnly cast tells the world who is the glorious symbol of the largest democracy. The political sanity, swaraj, sensitivity and self-assessment of India’s greatness by Indians are at stake. What a wonder! Please do not blunder.”
When the world is shrinking and big powers are making India a colonial market, the father of the nation is a euphemism unless he becomes a real power. The President cannot be a paper supremo. Our tryst with destiny and manifestation of divinity must find expression of excellence, symbolically though, through our President. It is a thousand pities that cabals of political parties and communal coteries so control the suffrage of MLAs and MPs with their totalitarian command that puppets are sought to be made Presidents and Presidents are sought to be made puppets.
(The writer is a former judge of the Supreme Court.)