Unit 3: The Judiciary - Subjective Questions

The judiciary is one of the three organs of the government and plays a vital role in protecting the Constitution, maintaining the rule of law, and safeguarding citizens' rights.

• It interprets the Constitution and laws enacted by legislatures.
• It resolves disputes between individuals, governments, and different levels of government.
• It protects Fundamental Rights through constitutional remedies.
• It exercises judicial review over legislative and executive actions.
• It maintains the supremacy of the Constitution by ensuring that all authorities function within constitutional limits.

Thus, an independent judiciary is essential for constitutional government and democracy in India.

India has an integrated and hierarchical judicial system rather than separate federal and state judicial systems.

The main levels are:

• Supreme Court of India: The highest court in the country.
• High Courts: The highest courts at the state or regional level.
• District and subordinate courts: Courts functioning under the supervision of High Courts.
• Specialised courts and tribunals: Established to deal with particular types of disputes.

The Supreme Court consists of the Chief Justice of India and other judges as determined by Parliament. Each High Court consists of a Chief Justice and other judges appointed according to constitutional provisions. Subordinate courts include district judges, civil courts, and criminal courts. This hierarchical structure facilitates appeals and ensures uniformity in the interpretation of law.

The Supreme Court consists of the Chief Justice of India and such number of other judges as Parliament may prescribe.

Appointment:

• Judges are formally appointed by the President of India.
• In practice, appointments are made through the collegium system, in which senior judges recommend candidates.
• The Chief Justice of India is generally the senior-most judge of the Supreme Court.

Qualifications: A person must be:

• A citizen of India; and
• A High Court judge for at least five years, or
• An advocate of a High Court for at least ten years, or
• In the opinion of the President, a distinguished jurist.

A Supreme Court judge retires at the age of 65 years. The constitutional requirements are intended to ensure legal competence, experience, and judicial independence.

High Court judges are appointed by the President of India after consultation with the Chief Justice of India, the Governor of the concerned state, and the Chief Justice of the relevant High Court.

Qualifications: A person must:

• Be a citizen of India; and
• Have held a judicial office in India for at least ten years, or
• Have been an advocate of a High Court for at least ten years.

Tenure:

• High Court judges retire at the age of 62 years.
• They may resign by writing to the President.
• They may be transferred from one High Court to another under constitutional provisions.

Removal: A High Court judge can be removed by the President only through the parliamentary process of impeachment for proved misbehaviour or incapacity. The process requires special majorities in both Houses of Parliament.

Judicial independence means that judges should be able to decide cases impartially and according to the Constitution and law, without pressure from the executive, legislature, political parties, or private interests.

Important safeguards include:

• Security of tenure, since judges cannot be removed easily.
• Fixed conditions of service and salaries charged on the Consolidated Fund of India.
• Restrictions on discussion of the conduct of judges in Parliament, except during removal proceedings.
• Separation of the judiciary from the executive in the subordinate judiciary.
• Power of the courts to punish for contempt.
• Judicial review of unconstitutional laws and executive actions.
• Restrictions on post-retirement legal practice by Supreme Court judges.

These safeguards promote impartiality, constitutional supremacy, and public confidence in the judicial system.

The original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court refers to cases that can be brought directly before it without first being heard by a lower court.

Under Article 131, the Supreme Court has exclusive original jurisdiction in disputes involving:

• The Government of India and one or more states.
• The Government of India and one or more states on one side and other states on the other side.
• Two or more states, when the dispute concerns a legal right.

The dispute must involve a question of law or fact on which the existence or extent of a legal right depends. Private individuals cannot generally invoke this jurisdiction. The purpose of this power is to settle federal disputes and maintain constitutional balance between the Union and the states.

The Supreme Court is the highest appellate court in India. Its appellate jurisdiction allows it to hear appeals against decisions of High Courts and other tribunals.

Appeals may be entertained in:

• Constitutional matters: When a High Court certifies that a substantial question of constitutional interpretation is involved.
• Civil matters: When the case involves a substantial question of law of general importance.
• Criminal matters: In specified situations, such as reversal of acquittal or imposition of a severe sentence.
• Special Leave to Appeal: Under Article 136, the Supreme Court may grant special leave to appeal from a judgment, order, or decision of any court or tribunal in India, except those relating to the armed forces.

This jurisdiction promotes uniformity and provides a final opportunity for legal correction.

Under Article 143, the President may refer a question of law or fact of public importance to the Supreme Court for its advisory opinion.

The President may seek advice when:

• The question has arisen or is likely to arise.
• The issue is of public importance.
• The President considers the opinion of the Court useful for constitutional or governmental purposes.

The Supreme Court hears the matter and gives its opinion. However, the advisory opinion is generally not binding on the President. The Court may also decline to answer in appropriate cases. This jurisdiction enables the executive to obtain authoritative legal guidance while preserving the distinction between judicial advice and a binding judicial decision.

Judicial review is the power of the courts to examine the constitutional validity of laws, executive orders, and governmental actions. If an action violates the Constitution, the court may declare it invalid or provide an appropriate remedy.

Its importance includes:

• Protecting Fundamental Rights.
• Maintaining the supremacy of the Constitution.
• Preventing arbitrary or unconstitutional government action.
• Preserving the federal distribution of powers.
• Ensuring that legislatures and executives remain within their constitutional limits.

Judicial review is exercised by both the Supreme Court and High Courts. It is considered a basic feature of the Constitution and cannot be completely removed by constitutional amendment.

Article 32 gives the Supreme Court the power to issue writs for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights. Dr. B. R. Ambedkar described this provision as the heart and soul of the Constitution.

The Supreme Court may issue:

• Habeas corpus: Protects against unlawful detention.
• Mandamus: Directs a public authority to perform a legal duty.
• Prohibition: Prevents a lower court or tribunal from exceeding its jurisdiction.
• Certiorari: Quashes an order passed by a lower court or tribunal acting unlawfully.
• Quo warranto: Questions the legal authority of a person occupying a public office.

Article 32 itself is a Fundamental Right. However, the Supreme Court generally cannot use this jurisdiction merely to enforce ordinary legal rights unless a Fundamental Right is also involved.

The Supreme Court and High Courts can both issue constitutional writs, but their jurisdiction differs in scope.

• Supreme Court: Under Article 32, it issues writs only for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights.
• High Courts: Under Article 226, they may issue writs for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights as well as other legal rights.
• Territorial scope: The Supreme Court's authority extends throughout India, while a High Court generally exercises jurisdiction within its territorial area and in situations connected with its jurisdiction.
• Nature of remedy: Article 32 is itself a Fundamental Right, whereas Article 226 is a constitutional power but not a Fundamental Right.
• Discretion: High Courts have wider discretion to refuse a writ when an effective alternative remedy exists.

Thus, High Courts have a wider writ jurisdiction in terms of the kinds of rights that may be enforced.

The Supreme Court acts as the guardian of the Constitution by ensuring that all organs of government operate within constitutional limits.

Its functions include:

• Interpreting constitutional provisions.
• Exercising judicial review over laws and executive actions.
• Enforcing Fundamental Rights through writs.
• Deciding disputes between the Union and states.
• Protecting the federal distribution of powers.
• Reviewing constitutional amendments that violate the basic structure.
• Giving authoritative interpretations that bind all courts in India.

Through these powers, the Supreme Court preserves constitutional supremacy and prevents the abuse of governmental authority.

The Supreme Court is the final court of appeal in the Indian judicial system. Its decisions provide the last stage of judicial review and legal correction.

• It hears appeals from High Courts in constitutional, civil, and criminal matters.
• It may grant special leave to appeal under Article 136.
• Its judgments are binding on all courts in India under Article 141.
• It may review its own judgments in accordance with constitutional and statutory provisions.
• It may issue appropriate orders to ensure complete justice under Article 142.

This appellate role promotes consistency in the interpretation of laws and ensures that serious errors made by lower courts can be corrected.

The Supreme Court has the power to review its judgments under Article 137, subject to laws made by Parliament and rules framed by the Court.

A review may be sought when:

• There is an apparent error on the face of the record.
• Important evidence was overlooked.
• The decision was affected by a serious procedural mistake.
• Principles of natural justice were violated.

A review petition is not a regular appeal. It cannot be used simply because a party disagrees with the decision. In exceptional cases, a curative petition may also be filed to prevent gross miscarriage of justice after dismissal of a review petition. This power balances the need for finality with the need to correct serious judicial errors.

Article 141:

• Declares that the law laid down by the Supreme Court is binding on all courts within India.
• Promotes uniformity and consistency in judicial decisions.
• Makes Supreme Court precedents an important source of constitutional and legal interpretation.

Article 142:

• Empowers the Supreme Court to pass orders necessary for doing complete justice in any case before it.
• Enables the Court to issue directions or remedies when ordinary legal provisions are inadequate.
• Must be exercised consistently with constitutional principles and cannot be used to override substantive law arbitrarily.

Together, these provisions strengthen the authority of the Supreme Court while enabling it to provide effective and comprehensive justice.

A High Court is the highest judicial institution in a state or group of states and union territories. It consists of a Chief Justice and other judges appointed according to the Constitution.

Its major jurisdictions include:

• Original jurisdiction in matters assigned by the Constitution or laws.
• Appellate jurisdiction over civil and criminal cases decided by subordinate courts.
• Writ jurisdiction under Article 226 for Fundamental Rights and other legal rights.
• Supervisory jurisdiction over subordinate courts and tribunals under Article 227.
• Judicial review of state legislation and executive action.
• Administrative control over subordinate courts in the state.

High Courts therefore serve as important constitutional, appellate, and supervisory institutions.

High Courts exercise both judicial and administrative control over subordinate courts within their jurisdiction.

Supervisory powers:

• They may call for records from subordinate courts.
• They may ensure that lower courts act within their jurisdiction.
• They may issue directions for proper judicial procedure.
• They may correct jurisdictional errors through appropriate constitutional remedies.

Administrative powers:

• They control the posting and promotion of district judges, subject to constitutional provisions.
• They supervise the functioning of subordinate courts.
• They frame rules and procedures for court administration.
• They maintain standards of judicial discipline and efficiency.

These powers help maintain independence, uniformity, and accountability within the lower judiciary.

The Supreme Court and High Courts are both constitutional courts, but they differ in status and functions.

• Position: The Supreme Court is the highest court in India; a High Court is the highest court within a state or group of states.
• Writ jurisdiction: The Supreme Court enforces Fundamental Rights under Article 32, while High Courts enforce Fundamental Rights and other legal rights under Article 226.
• Appellate role: The Supreme Court hears appeals from High Courts and other courts; High Courts hear appeals from subordinate courts.
• Territorial authority: The Supreme Court has jurisdiction throughout India; a High Court generally operates within its assigned territorial jurisdiction.
• Supervision: High Courts supervise subordinate courts; the Supreme Court does not ordinarily exercise day-to-day administrative supervision over them.
• Binding force: Supreme Court law binds all courts, while decisions of a High Court generally bind courts within its jurisdiction.

Public Interest Litigation, or PIL, is a legal action initiated for protecting the interests of a wider section of society, especially disadvantaged or marginalised groups.

Its contribution includes:

• Relaxing the traditional rule that only an directly affected person may approach the court.
• Enabling public-spirited individuals and organisations to raise issues affecting vulnerable groups.
• Addressing matters such as bonded labour, prison conditions, environmental protection, and rights of children.
• Making courts more accessible to people who cannot approach them personally.
• Encouraging government accountability and enforcement of constitutional rights.

However, courts discourage PILs filed for publicity, private gain, political motives, or interference in matters unrelated to genuine public interest.

The principle of separation of powers means that legislative, executive, and judicial functions should be distributed among different organs of government. India does not follow a completely rigid separation, but it maintains constitutional checks and balances.

In relation to the judiciary:

• Courts interpret laws but do not ordinarily make policy choices reserved for elected bodies.
• The executive and legislature must obey judicial decisions.
• Courts can invalidate unconstitutional laws and actions.
• The judiciary is protected from undue executive interference.
• Judicial independence ensures impartial adjudication.

The principle does not mean that the organs never interact. Instead, it requires each organ to respect constitutional boundaries while checking the misuse of power by others.