Constitutional provisions of Supreme Court of India

Constitutional provisions of Supreme Court of India

Introduction

In ancient times, when any wrong was done, it was on the lord to guarantee that the guilty party was rebuffed so the casualty gets help. After the constitution has been embraced This function of the lord has been supplanted by the Judiciary though different functions, for example, making the law and executing them are finished by the Legislature and the Executive.

To guarantee straightforwardness and reasonable work in the framework, the constitution-creators kept these three organs free of one another. The Judiciary is a definitive translator of the rights while it goes about as a gatekeeper of the constitution. It can likewise lead minds the legislature and the executive and guarantee that nobody goes past their ambit of intensity. The Constitution guarantees that the judiciary stays fair in all conditions.

We have various degrees of Judiciary which is available at the central level, the state level, and district level. In Part V of the constitution under chapter IV it talks about the Union Judiciary.

Appointment of Judges of Supreme Court- Article 124

The initial segment of this Article accommodates the setting up of the Supreme Court which will be made out of one Chief Justice of India and just seven judges until the Parliament by law endorses additional judges.

  • The second part of this Article states that the Chief Justice of India will be delegated by the President subsequent to counseling different judges whom he thinks reasonable and will hold the workplace until he achieves the age of 65 years. Though the president should consider the Chief Justice’s assessment when he selects different judges.
  • The quantity of judges was simply restricted to seven however the parliament by law recommended and changed that the quantity of judges ought to be expanded to 31, i.e., thirty judges and the Chief Justice of India. This was done so that they can work efficiently.
  • This Article in its part 2(a) says that a judge can by keeping in touch with the President, leave his position, though, this Article in its part 2(b) says that the judge can be taken out under the arrangement contained in condition 4.
  • SP Gupta v. Union of India- In concern with Article 124(2), the court stated that it only implies taking choice with respect to which judge of the Supreme court and the High court must be counseled while selecting the judges of the Supreme Court and High court, though it doesn’t give a choice to the public author ity to mull over the opinion of the judges. They maintained the supremacy of the Executive.
  • Supreme court Advocates on Record Association v. Union of India- the court decided that there ought to be a collegium system which on account of the Supreme Court will comprise of the Chief Justice of India and two senior-most judges. What’s more, while accepting the choice concerning who might take the post of CJI both of the judges of the collegium will offer their input and CJI should contemplate that. From that point onward, the choice of the collegium will go to the President for his assent. While, on account of High Court it will be the Chief Justice of the High Court and the two senior-most judges, and the strategy subsequently, is equivalent to for the SC.

Presently what truly happened was that the Chief Justice of India, on occasion didn’t consider the opinion given by different judges and would take the choice of his own and give it to the President for his assent. This case essentially kept up judicial supremacy.

  • In Re Special Reference casethe court ruled that the senior-most judge will take the assignment of CJI and to the extent the judges of the Supreme court are concerned, the Supreme Court collegium will prescribe the president to which he will give his assent.
See also  REAL ESTATE ( REGULATION AND DEVELOPMENT)ACT 2016 : ANALYSIS

Special leave petition (SLP) under Article 136

Article 136 empowers the Supreme Court to allow special leave of appeal for any request, judgment or sentence which is passed by any court or tribunal in the nation. It is pays attention to anything contained in the chapter concerning the Union Judiciary and don’t have any significant bearing to any issue concerning Armed forces.

Nature and Scope

  • Special Leave Petitions in India (SLP) holds an excellent spot in the Judiciary of India, and has been given as a “residual force” in the possession of Supreme Court of India to be practiced distinctly in situations when any generous inquiry of law is included, or net injustice has been finished.
  • It gives the bothered party a special consent to be heard in Apex Court in appeal against any judgment or request of any Court/tribunal in the region of India (aside from military tribunal and court martial).
  • The Constitution of India under Article 136 vests the Supreme Court of India, the apex court of the nation, with a special capacity to concede special leave, to appeal against any judgment or request or announcement in any issue or cause, passed or made by any Court/tribunal in the region of India. It is to be utilized in the event that any generous constitutional inquiry of law is included, or net injustice has been finished.
  • It is optional force vested in the Supreme Court of India and the court may in its attentiveness will not concede leave to appeal. The distressed party can’t guarantee special leave to appeal under Article 136 as a right, however it is advantage vested in the Supreme Court of India to concede leave to appeal or not.

Limitation

  • SLP can be recorded against any judgment or announcement or request of any High Court/tribunal in the region of India, or
  • SLP can be documented on the off chance that the High court won’t allow the endorsement of readiness for appeal to Supreme Court of India.
  • SLP can be documented against any judgment of High Court inside 90 days from the date of judgment, or
  • SLP can be recorded inside 60 days against the request for the High Court declining to give the testament of qualification for appeal to Supreme Court.
  • Any abused party can document SLP against the judgment or request of refusal of award of authentication.
  • Dhakeswari Cotton Mills v. C.I.T (1955)- The SC for this situation saw that “the entire expectation and motivation behind this Article is that it is the obligation of this court to see that injustice isn’t sustained or executed by choices of courts and tribunals in light of the fact that specific laws have settled on the choices of these courts or tribunals last and convincing.”
  • Union Corbide Corp. v. UOI (1992)- The SC held that the forces gave on the SC U/A 136 of the Constitution are in the idea of special is residuary forces exercisable in situations were necessities of justice request obstruction.
  • Pritam Singh v. The State (1950)- This was an appeal by special leave from a judgment and request of the High Court of Judicature for the Province of East Punjab at Shimla. For this situation the Supreme Court set out the expansive principles inside which it would practice its jurisdiction in giving special leave under this Article

Constitution of High Courts in the states

Under the British guideline, every High Court has a Chief Justice and maximum 15 other puisne judges. Yet, later certain progressions were achieved in the arrangement of the High Court in India:

  • Each High Court will have a Chief Justice selected by the President
  • Not at all like previously, there was no fixed number of Judges who could be delegated for every High Court
  • Additional Judges can likewise be delegated for the freedom of cases forthcoming in the court. Yet, their tenure can’t surpass over two years
See also  Freedom of Speech and Expression - Article 19(1)(a)

One thing that should be noted is that nobody over the age of 62 years can be delegated as a High Court Judge. There is no consistency among the High Courts with respect to the quantity of Judges they will have. A smaller state will have less number of judges in contrast with a bigger state.

Powers and jurisdiction of the High Courts of the states

Powers of HC:

  1. As a Court of Record

    • High Courts are likewise Courts of Record (like the Supreme Court).
    • The records of the judgements of the High Courts can be utilized by subordinate courts for choosing cases.
    • All High Courts have the ability to punish all cases of contempt by any individual or organization.
  2. Administrative Powers

    1. It oversees and controls all the subordinate courts.
    2. It can request subtleties of proceedings from subordinate courts.
    3. It issues rules with respect to the working of the subordinate courts.
    4. It can move any case starting with one court then onto the next and can likewise move the case to itself and choose the equivalent.
    5. It can enquire into the records or other associated reports of any subordinate court.
    6. It can select its administration staff and decide their salaries and allowances, and conditions of service.
  3. Power of Judicial ReviewHC has the power to state any law or ordinance as unconstitutional if it is against Indian Constitution.
  4. Certification Power

    HC alone can decide the cases which are fit for appeal before the Supreme Court.

Jurisdictions of HC:

  1. Original Jurisdiction- in this case the candidate can straightforwardly go to the High Court and doesn’t need to raise an appeal. It is generally pertinent for cases identified with the State Legislative Assembly, marriages, authorization of fundamental rights and move cases from different courts.
  2. Power of Superintendence- It a special force delighted in simply by High Court and no other subordinate court has this intensity of superintendence. Under this, the High Court holds the option to arrange its subordinate offices and courts the method of looking after records, endorse rules for holding proceedings in the court and furthermore settle the expenses paid to sheriff clerks, officers and legal practitioners.
  3. Court of Record- It includes recording the decisions, proceedings and demonstrations of high courts for never-ending memory. These records can’t be additionally addressed in any court. It has the ability to punish for contempt of itself.
  4. Appellate Jurisdiction-

    • This is for situations where individuals have risen a protest about a review of the judgment given by the district level or subordinate court of that domain. This force is additionally partitioned into two classes:
    1. Civil Jurisdiction – this incorporates requests and judgements of the district court, civil district court and subordinate court
    2. Criminal Jurisdiction – this incorporates judgements and requests of the sessions court and additional sessions court.

    Public Interest Litigation

  • Public interest Litigation (PIL) implies litigation documented in a court of law, for the assurance of “Public Interest, for example, Pollution, Terrorism, Road wellbeing, Constructional perils etc.
  • Public interest litigation is the force given to the public by courts through judicial activism.
  • The court would itself be able to take cognizance of the issue and continue Suo motu or cases can begin on the appeal of any public spirited individual.
  • Hussainara Khatoon v. State of Bihar (1979)- Right to fast justice arose as an essential thing right which had been denied to these detainees.
  • S.P. Gupta v. Union of India- it was held that “any individual from the public or social action group acting bonafide” can conjure the Writ Jurisdiction of the High Courts (under article 226) or the Supreme Court (under Article 32) looking for redressal against infringement of legal or constitutional rights of people who because of social or economic or some other inability can’t move toward the Court.
  • MC Mehta v. Union of India- Supreme Court held that petitioner although not a riparian owner is qualified to move the court for the requirement of statutory provisions, as he is the individual interested in securing the lives of the individuals who utilize Ganga water.

Constitutional provisions that safeguard the independence of judiciary

  1. Judicial appointments

    • Article 124– appointment of Judges to the Supreme Court
    • Article 217– appointment of Judges to High Courts.
    • Articles 124 to 147 in Chapter IV of Part V under the inscription Union Judiciary manages the foundation and constitution of Supreme Court, the appointment of judges and their forces rights, jurisdiction and service conditions, and so on.
    • Article 214 to 231 in Chapter V of the Part VI under the subtitle The High court’s in the states manages the constitution of High Court, the jurisdiction, the appointment and conditions of the office of a Judge of a High Court, his forces, rights, service conditions, including move starting with one High Court then onto the next and so on.
  2. Qualifications

    • Article 124(3) endorses qualifications of an individual who can be selected as a Judge of the Supreme Court and peruses as follows:
    • An individual will not be appointed as a Judge of the Supreme Court except if he is a citizen of India and
    1. has been at least five years a Judge of a High Court or of at least two such court in succession
    2. has been at least ten years an advocate of a High Court or of at least two such courts in succession
    3. is, in the opinion of the President
    • The qualification of a High Court judge is set out in Article 217(2) as under:

    An individual will not be qualified for appointment as a Judge of a High Court except if he is a citizen of India and

    1. has at least ten years held a judicial office in the domain of India
    2. has at least ten years been an advocate of a High Court or of at least two such courts in succession.
  3. Salaries and Allowances

    • Article 112 (3) (d) (I) of the Constitution necessitated that spending plan will contain an arrangement for installment of salaries and allowances and pensions to Judges of the Supreme Court.

    Article 202 (3) (d) manages the salaries and allowances of High Court

  4. Removal of judges In India, both the Supreme Court and High Court Judges are designated by the President under Article 124 and 217, and they appreciated a fixed tenure and are removable under Articles 124(4) and 217 on demonstrated misbehavior or inadequacy after an impeachment movement passed by each house upheld by a specified majority. Their tenure and diverse cycle of expulsion are additionally in line with their free function
  5. Transfer of judges

    Article 222(1) enables the President after counsel with Chief Justice of India move a judge starting with one High Court then onto the next.

  6. Power to punish for its contempt

    Contempt of Court finds a spot in the Indian Constitution under Article 19(2), Article 129 and Article 215.

    • Article 19(2) of the Constitution, contempt of Court’ is one of the grounds on which the State can enact to put reasonable restrictions on freedom of speech.
    • Article 129 of the Constitution of India says that the Supreme Court will be a ‘court of record’.
    • Article 215 awards a comparable status to the High Courts.
  7. Prohibition on practice after retirement

    • A High Court Judge, can after retirement, practice in the Supreme Court or in a High Court wherein he had not been a Judge as per Article 220.
    • Article 124(7) doesn’t make a bar or disqualification for a Judge of the Supreme Court to offer his candidature for participation or to turn into a Member of Parliament.
  8. Condition of service

    The conditions of service have direct worry with the everyday functioning of the judge just as the security in its different measurements after retirement. By conditions of service here we mean those terms and conditions inside which a judge needs to act during and after his service as a judge.

Author: Kavya S,
CHRIST (Deemed to be University), 4th year BA LLB

Leave a Comment