Understand the powers of the Supreme Court and its role in India’s justice system. Recent rulings and key decisions explained.
Table of Contents
The Supreme Court stands as the final arbiter of justice in India, a cornerstone of its democratic framework. This article delves into the multifaceted role of the Supreme Court, exploring its constitutional powers, analyzing its significant rulings, and examining recent events that have brought it under scrutiny. From interpreting the Constitution to safeguarding fundamental rights, the Supreme Court’s decisions profoundly impact the lives of citizens and the direction of the nation. The recent news regarding the rejection of a plea for restoring a Lord Vishnu idol in Khajuraho has ignited discussions about the court’s stance on religious matters, leading to debates about its impartiality and the application of its authority across different religions.
The Constitutional Foundation of the Supreme Court
The Supreme Court’s authority is rooted in the Constitution of India, specifically Part V, Chapter IV. Articles 124 to 147 detail its composition, jurisdiction, and powers. Understanding these constitutional provisions is crucial to appreciating the Supreme Court’s role as the guardian of the Constitution.
Composition and Appointment of Judges
Article 124 outlines the composition of the Supreme Court, which consists of a Chief Justice of India (CJI) and a number of other judges. The number of judges has increased over time to manage the growing caseload. The President of India appoints the CJI and other judges of the Supreme Court. The appointment process involves consultation with the existing judges of the Supreme Court, ensuring that the most qualified individuals are selected. The Collegium system, a practice evolved through judicial pronouncements, plays a significant role in recommending candidates for appointment.
Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court
The Supreme Court has original, appellate, and advisory jurisdiction.
- Original Jurisdiction:Â Article 131 grants the Supreme Court original jurisdiction in disputes between the Government of India and one or more states, or between states themselves. This jurisdiction ensures that the Supreme Court can resolve federal disputes and maintain the balance of power between the central government and the states.
- Appellate Jurisdiction:Â Article 132 provides the Supreme Court with appellate jurisdiction over cases involving a substantial question of law relating to the interpretation of the Constitution. This means that cases from High Courts can be appealed to the Supreme Court if they involve significant constitutional issues. Articles 133 and 134 further detail the appellate jurisdiction in civil and criminal matters, respectively.
- Advisory Jurisdiction:Â Article 143 empowers the President of India to seek the Supreme Court’s opinion on any question of law or fact of public importance. This advisory jurisdiction allows the government to obtain legal guidance from the Supreme Court on complex issues, ensuring that policy decisions are made with a clear understanding of their legal implications.
Landmark Judgments of the Supreme Court
Over the years, the Supreme Court has delivered numerous landmark judgments that have shaped the legal landscape of India. These judgments have clarified constitutional principles, protected fundamental rights, and set precedents for future cases.
Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973)
This case is arguably the most significant in Indian constitutional history. The Supreme Court established the doctrine of the “basic structure” of the Constitution, which holds that Parliament cannot amend the Constitution in a way that alters its fundamental features. This doctrine has been instrumental in safeguarding the Constitution from arbitrary amendments and ensuring its integrity. The basic structure includes principles such as the rule of law, judicial review, and secularism.
Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978)
This case expanded the scope of Article 21 of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to life and personal liberty. The Supreme Court ruled that the right to life includes the right to live with dignity and that any law restricting personal liberty must be fair, just, and reasonable. This judgment has had a profound impact on the protection of individual rights and freedoms in India.
Indira Sawhney v. Union of India (1992)
Also known as the Mandal Commission case, this judgment upheld the government’s policy of reservations for Other Backward Classes (OBCs) in government jobs and educational institutions. The Supreme Court clarified that reservations should not exceed 50% of the total seats and introduced the concept of the “creamy layer” to exclude economically advanced members of the OBCs from benefiting from reservations.
Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan (1997)
This case addressed the issue of sexual harassment in the workplace. The Supreme Court laid down guidelines and norms for employers to prevent and address sexual harassment until legislation was enacted by Parliament. These guidelines, known as the Vishaka Guidelines, were crucial in providing a framework for protecting women from sexual harassment at work.
Right to Privacy Judgment (2017)
In a landmark decision, the Supreme Court declared the right to privacy as a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution. This judgment has far-reaching implications for data protection, surveillance, and individual autonomy. The court emphasized that the right to privacy is not absolute but is subject to reasonable restrictions.
Recent Controversies Surrounding the Supreme Court
The Supreme Court, like any institution, has faced its share of controversies in recent years. These controversies have raised questions about its independence, transparency, and accountability.
The National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC)
The NJAC was a proposed body to replace the Collegium system for the appointment of judges to the Supreme Court and High Courts. The NJAC was established through a constitutional amendment and a related law. However, the Supreme Court struck down the NJAC in 2015, holding that it violated the independence of the judiciary, which is a basic feature of the Constitution. This decision sparked a debate about the role of the judiciary in the appointment of judges and the need for reforms in the judicial appointment process.
Allegations of Impropriety
In recent years, there have been allegations of impropriety and misconduct against some judges of the Supreme Court. These allegations have raised concerns about the integrity of the judiciary and the need for greater transparency and accountability. The Supreme Court has taken steps to address these concerns, including establishing internal mechanisms for investigating complaints against judges.
Delays in Justice
One of the major challenges facing the Supreme Court is the huge backlog of cases. This has led to delays in justice, which can have a significant impact on the lives of litigants. The Supreme Court has taken various measures to address this issue, including streamlining procedures, using technology to improve efficiency, and appointing additional judges. However, the backlog remains a significant concern.
The Supreme Court and Fundamental Rights
The Supreme Court plays a crucial role in protecting the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution. These rights include the right to equality, freedom of speech and expression, freedom of religion, and the right to constitutional remedies.
Article 32: Right to Constitutional Remedies
Article 32 of the Constitution guarantees the right to constitutional remedies, which means that individuals can approach the Supreme Court directly if their fundamental rights are violated. The Supreme Court has the power to issue writs, such as habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, certiorari, and quo warranto, to enforce fundamental rights. This power makes the Supreme Court the ultimate guardian of fundamental rights.
Public Interest Litigation (PIL)
The Supreme Court has played a pioneering role in promoting public interest litigation (PIL). PIL allows individuals or organizations to approach the court on behalf of the public to address issues of public concern, such as environmental pollution, human rights violations, and corruption. PIL has been instrumental in holding the government and other authorities accountable and in promoting social justice.
Balancing Fundamental Rights
The Supreme Court often faces the challenge of balancing competing fundamental rights. For example, the right to freedom of speech and expression may conflict with the right to privacy or the right to equality. The Supreme Court has developed principles and doctrines to resolve these conflicts, ensuring that fundamental rights are protected while also taking into account the interests of society as a whole.
The Supreme Court’s Role in Interpreting the Constitution
The Supreme Court is the final interpreter of the Constitution. Its interpretations are binding on all courts and authorities in India. The Supreme Court’s role in interpreting the Constitution is crucial to ensuring that the Constitution remains relevant and adaptable to changing social and economic conditions.
Constitutional Interpretation Doctrines
The Supreme Court has developed various doctrines and principles for interpreting the Constitution. These include the doctrine of harmonious construction, the doctrine of pith and substance, and the doctrine of implied powers. These doctrines guide the Supreme Court in resolving ambiguities and interpreting the Constitution in a way that promotes its overall purpose and objectives.
Amending the Constitution
Article 368 of the Constitution provides the procedure for amending the Constitution. However, the Supreme Court has held that Parliament cannot amend the Constitution in a way that alters its basic structure. This limitation on the amending power ensures that the fundamental principles and values of the Constitution are preserved.
The Supreme Court and Judicial Review
The Supreme Court has the power of judicial review, which means that it can review laws and government actions to determine whether they are consistent with the Constitution. If the Supreme Court finds that a law or government action is unconstitutional, it can strike it down.
Scope of Judicial Review
The scope of judicial review is a subject of ongoing debate. Some argue that the Supreme Court should exercise judicial review sparingly, while others argue that it should be more active in protecting fundamental rights and upholding the Constitution. The Supreme Court has generally adopted a balanced approach, exercising judicial review with caution but also being willing to strike down laws and government actions that are clearly unconstitutional.
Limitations on Judicial Review
The power of judicial review is not unlimited. The Supreme Court has recognized certain limitations on its power, such as the doctrine of political questions, which holds that the court should not decide issues that are properly within the domain of the political branches of government. The Supreme Court has also recognized the need for deference to the decisions of the executive and legislative branches in certain areas, such as national security and economic policy.
The Supreme Court and the Separation of Powers
The doctrine of separation of powers is a fundamental principle of the Indian Constitution. It holds that the powers of the government should be divided among the legislative, executive, and judicial branches, with each branch having its own distinct functions and responsibilities. The Supreme Court plays a crucial role in upholding the separation of powers by ensuring that the legislative and executive branches do not exceed their constitutional limits.
Checks and Balances
The Supreme Court’s power of judicial review serves as a check on the legislative and executive branches. By reviewing laws and government actions, the Supreme Court ensures that they are consistent with the Constitution. This system of checks and balances is essential to preventing any one branch of government from becoming too powerful.
Judicial Independence
Judicial independence is essential to the effective functioning of the separation of powers. The Supreme Court must be free from undue influence from the legislative and executive branches in order to make impartial decisions based on the law and the Constitution. The Constitution contains provisions to protect judicial independence, such as security of tenure for judges and the power to punish for contempt of court.
The Supreme Court and Religious Matters
The Supreme Court has often been involved in cases involving religious matters, particularly in interpreting and applying the constitutional provisions relating to freedom of religion. Article 25 of the Constitution guarantees freedom of conscience and free profession, practice, and propagation of religion, subject to public order, morality, and health. However, the application of these provisions has often been complex and controversial.
Secularism
India is a secular state, which means that the state does not have an official religion and treats all religions equally. The Supreme Court has played a crucial role in upholding secularism by ensuring that the government does not discriminate on the basis of religion and that all religions are treated with respect.
Essential Religious Practices
The Supreme Court has developed the doctrine of “essential religious practices,” which distinguishes between essential and non-essential practices of a religion. The state can regulate non-essential practices but cannot interfere with essential religious practices. This doctrine has been used in various cases to determine the extent to which the state can regulate religious activities.
The Ayodhya Dispute
The Ayodhya dispute, involving the Babri Masjid and the Ram Janmabhoomi, was one of the most sensitive and politically charged cases in Indian history. The Supreme Court delivered its judgment in 2019, allocating the disputed land for the construction of a Ram temple and directing the government to allocate land for the construction of a mosque. This judgment was widely seen as an attempt to resolve the dispute peacefully and to uphold the principles of secularism and religious harmony.
“Go and ask the deity,” Supreme Court rejects plea for restoring Lord Vishnu idol in Khajuraho
The Supreme Court recently rejected a plea seeking the restoration of a Lord Vishnu idol in Khajuraho, with the bench suggesting that the petitioners should directly consult the deity for guidance. This decision has triggered a wave of reactions, particularly questioning whether such a response would be given if the case involved any other religion. Critics argue that this highlights a perceived bias in the court’s handling of religious matters. The issue has stirred debate on social media and among legal circles, with many expressing concerns about the implications of such judicial remarks on secularism and equal treatment under the law. This particular case underscores the complexities and sensitivities involved when the judiciary deals with religious matters, raising questions about fairness and consistency in its approach.
Criticism and Challenges Facing the Supreme Court
Despite its important role in upholding the Constitution and protecting fundamental rights, the Supreme Court faces various criticisms and challenges.
Pendency of Cases
The huge backlog of cases is one of the most significant challenges facing the Supreme Court. This has led to delays in justice, which can have a significant impact on the lives of litigants. The Supreme Court has taken various measures to address this issue, including streamlining procedures, using technology to improve efficiency, and appointing additional judges. However, the backlog remains a significant concern.
Lack of Transparency
The Supreme Court has been criticized for its lack of transparency, particularly in the appointment of judges. The Collegium system, which is used to appoint judges, has been criticized for being opaque and unaccountable. There have been calls for greater transparency in the judicial appointment process, including making the deliberations of the Collegium public.
Politicization of the Judiciary
There have been concerns about the politicization of the judiciary, with allegations that some judges are influenced by political considerations. This can undermine the independence and impartiality of the judiciary. It is essential to ensure that judges are appointed based on their merit and competence and that they are free from undue influence from the political branches of government.
The Future of the Supreme Court
The Supreme Court will continue to play a crucial role in shaping the future of India. As the final interpreter of the Constitution and the guardian of fundamental rights, the Supreme Court will face numerous challenges in the years to come.
Reforms in the Judicial System
There is a need for comprehensive reforms in the judicial system to address issues such as the pendency of cases, the lack of transparency, and the politicization of the judiciary. These reforms should aim to improve the efficiency, accountability, and independence of the judicial system.
Adapting to Changing Times
The Supreme Court must adapt to changing social and economic conditions in order to remain relevant and effective. This includes embracing new technologies, developing new legal doctrines, and addressing emerging challenges such as climate change and cybersecurity.
Supreme Court and its decisions
The Supreme Court is indeed an indispensable pillar of India’s democratic framework. Its decisions reverberate through society, shaping laws, protecting rights, and influencing governance. Understanding its constitutional foundation, landmark judgments, and the controversies it faces offers invaluable insight into the workings of the Indian legal system. As it navigates complex challenges and continues to adapt to changing times, the Supreme Court’s role as the guardian of the Constitution remains paramount. The recent debate surrounding the “Go and ask the deity” remark underscores the ongoing need for judicial sensitivity, impartiality, and consistency in its approach to religious matters, ensuring that justice is not only done but also seen to be done, for all citizens, irrespective of their faith. The institution’s future relies on continuous improvement, adaptation, and a firm commitment to the principles of justice, fairness, and equality under the law. The Indian Supreme Court will always remain a focal point of discussions, legal analyses, and public discourse. It must uphold the tenets of justice, equity, and fairness in all matters brought before it.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court is a vital institution in India’s democratic framework. Its decisions shape the legal landscape, protect fundamental rights, and influence the lives of millions of citizens. While it faces numerous challenges, including the pendency of cases, lack of transparency, and allegations of impropriety, the Supreme Court remains committed to upholding the Constitution and promoting justice. As India continues to evolve, the Supreme Court will play a crucial role in ensuring that the country remains a just, fair, and democratic society. The power of the Supreme Court lies not only in its ability to interpret the law but also in its commitment to upholding the values of the Constitution. The Supreme Court, therefore, acts as both a guardian of the past and a guide for the future, ensuring that India remains true to its founding principles while adapting to the challenges of a rapidly changing world.
