💥Join UPSC 2027,2028 Mentorship (July Batch) + XFactor Notes & Microthemes PDF
Talk to Mentor

Civilsdaily

Login

Subject: Judiciary

  • Should India have regional benches of the Supreme Court?

    Why in the News?

    Recently, the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Personnel, Public Grievances, Law and Justice informed the Lok Sabha that the Law Ministry has accepted its recommendation to establish regional benches of the Supreme Court across India.

    About the Supreme Court:

    • The Supreme Court of India has three jurisdictions under the Constitution: original, appellate, and advisory.
    • The Supreme Court serves as a Constitutional Court as well as a Court of Appeal. The Court sits in benches of varying sizes, as determined by the Registry on the directions of the Chief Justice of India (CJI).

    About SC Constitution Benches:

    • Constitution Bench typically comprises of five, seven, or nine judges who deliberate on a specific issue related to constitutional law.
    • Article 130 says that “the Supreme Court shall sit in Delhi or in such other place or places, as the Chief Justice of India may, with the approval of the President, from time to time, appoint.” It shows that the Supreme Court Rules give the Chief Justice of India the power to constitute Benches.
    • Article 145(3) of the Constitution provides for the setting up of a Constitution Bench.
      • Under Article 143, a minimum of five judges need to sit for deciding a case involving a “substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution”, or for hearing any reference, which deals with the power of the President to consult the Court.

     View of Supreme Court on setting of regional benches

    • Recently, CJI D.Y. Chandrachud announced his intent to create Constitution Benches of varied strengths as a permanent feature of the Court.
    • The Parliamentary Standing Committee on Personnel, Public Grievances, Law and Justice had earlier noted that the demand for having regional benches of the Supreme Court is about ‘access to justice,’ which is a Fundamental Right under the Constitution. However, the Supreme Court previously has been continuously rejecting the idea.
    • During 2019, former Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi supported the view, but minimal progress was made during his tenure. In contrast, during the 74-day tenure of former Chief Justice U.U. Lalit, 25 Constitution Bench matters were listed before five-judge benches.

    Recommendations by the Law Commissions on the setting of regional benches:

    • 10th Law Commission (95th Report), 1984: The Supreme Court of India should consist of two Divisions, namely (a) Constitutional Division, and (b) Legal Division”, and that “only matters of Constitutional law may be assigned to the proposed Constitutional Division”.
    • 11th Law Commission (125th Report), 1988: Recommended for splitting the (Supreme) Court into two halves deserves to be implemented.
    • 18th Law Commission (229th Report), 2009: Recommended that “a Constitution Bench be set up at Delhi to deal with constitutional and other allied issues”, and “four Cassation Benches be set up in the Northern region/zone at Delhi, the Southern region/zone at Chennai/Hyderabad, the Eastern region/zone at Kolkata and the Western region/zone at Mumbai to deal with all appellate work arising out of the orders/judgments of the High Courts of the particular region”.

    The Union Government today said the setting up of the Regional Benches of the Supreme Court in different parts of the country is under examination of the Constitutional Bench of the Supreme

    Significance of Regional Benches in India:

    • High Pendency of Cases: In the Supreme Court, a little more than 80,000 cases are currently pending adjudication out of which 60,000 cases are civil. This cannot be alleviated only through usual methods and is highly dependent upon the efforts and efficiency of the Chief Justice.
    • Insufficient Case Disposal Rates: In 2023, the Supreme Court witnessed a 31% increase in the disposal of cases compared to 2022.
      • However, such a disposal rate is negligible when compared to the total pendency of cases.
    • Democratization of Justice: The setting up of regional benches would also lead to greater opportunities and the democratization of the Bar.
      • For example, there was lots of opposition when the jurisdiction of the Tis Hazari Court was divided into different district courts. However, 10-15 years down the line, a vibrant District Bar in Saket, Rohini, and Karkardooma can be seen.
    • Access to Justice for All: People are reluctant to accept arbitrary actions of the state and its agencies and are increasingly approaching courts of law. The outcome of such cases demands further adjudication by the Supreme Court. Also, it becomes difficult for people living in States far away from Delhi to agitate their cause.
    • Importance of Litigant Presence: It is easy to say that the presence of a litigant is not required in appellate forums but the reality is that every litigant wishes to visit his lawyer and witness court proceedings involving his case.
    • Boosting Judicial System with More Judges: The establishment of regional benches will increase the number of judges as well as lawyers resulting in a much-needed boost to our judicial system.

    Challenges associated with regional benches:

    • Status issues:
      • Dilution of sacrosanct nature: Critics argue that the idea of setting up regional benches will lead to Balkanization of the Supreme Court and lessen the binding force of the decisions of the Supreme Court.
      • Territorial Interference: India being diverse country, have emerging diverse views in judiciary too. Hence, the newly formed regional benches can create conflict of interest by interfering in the territorial jurisdiction of the HCs which may adversely affect our justice system.
    • Implementation issues:
      • Rectifying the imbalances: Major of the cases filed in Apex court, arise from nearby High Courts in north India, this imbalance cannot be rectified by using this solution.
      • Frivolous Petitions: If Justice is that easily accessible considering geographical aspect, there is a possibility of numerous frivolous petitions being filed.

    Way Forward:

    • Need for Enhancing Judicial Infrastructure: Some broader judicial reforms are needed to address the systemic issues such as judicial backlog, delay in justice delivery, and judicial vacancies, which are crucial for improving the overall functioning of the legal system.
      • Explore the use of technology, such as video conferencing and virtual courtrooms, to enhance access to justice and facilitate remote adjudication of cases, especially in remote or underserved areas.
    • Need a balanced approach: The debate on regional benches for the Supreme Court involves considerations of accessibility, case management, and judicial efficiency. While proponents see it as vital for access, opponents emphasize potential drawbacks. Striking a balance necessitates thorough evaluation and careful implementation of reforms.

  • Notable Jurist Fali S Nariman Passes Away at 95

    nariman

    Introduction

    • Fali S. Nariman, an eminent jurist and Senior Advocate, left an indelible mark on India’s legal landscape over his illustrious 75-year career.
    • Representing clients in a multitude of landmark cases, his contributions reshaped constitutional jurisprudence and safeguarded democratic principles.

    Legacy in Indian Jurisprudence

    [1] Upholding Judicial Independence: The Second Judges Case

    • Legal Battle: Advocating before the Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association v. Union of India (1981), Nariman challenged the interpretation of “consultation” in judicial appointments, emphasizing its binding nature to preserve judicial autonomy.
    • Judicial Triumph: Nariman’s advocacy led to the establishment of the Supreme Court Collegium, ensuring transparent and independent judicial appointments, a landmark decision that endures to this day.

    [2] Clarifying Judicial Procedures: The Third Judges Case

    • Presidential Reference: Nariman contributed to the Supreme Court’s deliberations in Special Reference 1 (1998), facilitating a structured consultative process for judicial appointments, reinforcing the judiciary’s collective responsibility.
    • Expanded Collegium: His efforts expanded the scope of judicial consultation, enhancing transparency and accountability in the appointment process.

    [3] Protecting Judicial Independence: National Judicial Appointments Commission Case

    • Challenging Executive Interference: In Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association v. Union of India, Nariman vehemently opposed the National Judicial Appointment Commission Act, 2014, safeguarding judicial autonomy against executive overreach.
    • Triumph for Collegium System: His advocacy contributed to the reinstatement of the collegium system, preserving the judiciary’s prerogative in judicial appointments.

    [4] Championing Fundamental Rights: Golak Nath v. State of Punjab Case

    • Constitutional Challenge: Nariman’s intervention in Golak Nath v. State of Punjab (1967) underscored Parliament’s limitations in amending fundamental rights, reinforcing the sanctity of constitutional provisions.
    • Protecting Liberties: His advocacy upheld the inviolability of fundamental rights, ensuring the primacy of constitutional principles.

    [5] Bhopal Gas Tragedy: Union Carbide Corporation v. Union of India (1989)

    • Navigating Tragedy: Nariman’s representation of Union Carbide in the aftermath of the Bhopal gas tragedy facilitated a landmark settlement, ensuring timely compensation for victims and environmental remediation.

    [6] Safeguarding Minority Rights: TMA Pai Foundation v. State of Karnataka

    • Advocating Pluralism: Nariman’s involvement in TMA Pai Foundation v. State of Karnataka underscored the constitutional protection of minority rights in education, fostering inclusivity and diversity in the educational landscape.

    [7] Upholding Constitutional Norms: Nabam Rebia v. Deputy Speaker

    • Restoring Constitutional Order: Nariman’s intervention in Nabam Rebia v. Deputy Speaker (2016) reaffirmed the constitutional mandate for gubernatorial action, preserving democratic governance and institutional integrity.

    [8] Ensuring Legal Fairness: J. Jayalalithaa v. State of Tamil Nadu

    • Securing Justice: Nariman’s successful bail plea for Jayalalithaa exemplified his commitment to due process, ensuring equitable legal treatment for all individuals before the law.

    [9] Resolving Inter-State Disputes: State of Karnataka v. State of Tamil Nadu

    • Navigating Complexities: Nariman’s representation in the Cauvery water dispute showcased his dedication to resolving interstate conflicts through legal avenues, contributing to the equitable allocation of vital natural resources.

    Conclusion

    • Fali S. Nariman’s illustrious legal career stands as a testament to his unwavering commitment to justice, constitutionalism, and the rule of law.
    • His profound influence on Indian jurisprudence reverberates through landmark decisions and enduring legal principles, leaving an indelible mark on the nation’s legal landscape.

    Try this PYQ from CSP 2012:

    What is the provision to safeguard the autonomy of the Supreme Court of India?

    1. While appointing the Supreme Court Judges, the President of India has to consult the Chief Justice of India.
    2. The Supreme Court Judges can be removed by the Chief Justice of India only.
    3. The salaries of the Judges are charged on the Consolidated Fund of India to which the legislative does not have to vote.
    4. All appointments of officers and staffs of the Supreme Court of India are made by the Government only after consulting the Chief Justice of India.

    Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

    1. 1 and 3 only
    2. 3 and 4 only
    3. 4 only
    4. 1, 2, 3 and 4

    [wpdiscuz-feedback id=”0xtz0ve9ke” question=”Please leave a feedback on this” opened=”1″]Post your answers here.[/wpdiscuz-feedback]

  • Judicial clarity on free speech

    Kunal Kamra held Arnab Goswami to account. What's with the outrage?

    Central Idea:

    Justice Gautam Patel’s landmark decision on the Kunal Kamra’s case underscores the critical importance of upholding the constitutional right to free speech, particularly in the realm of social media. The decision highlights the inherent dangers of arbitrary censorship and the need for clear, reasonable restrictions in line with constitutional principles.

    Key Highlights:

    • Upholding Free Speech: The decision reaffirms the sacrosanct nature of the constitutional guarantee of free speech, emphasizing its protection against undue state encroachment.
    • Rejection of Arbitrary Censorship: Justice Patel condemns the amended Rule 3(1)(b)(v) of the IT Rules 2021 as vague and overbroad, posing a threat to critical discourse and debate.
    • Constitutional Principles: The judgment invokes Article 19 and Article 14 of the Constitution, arguing that the amended rule infringes upon fundamental rights and lacks reasonable standards.
    • Importance of Judicial Review: The decision underscores the role of judicial review in curbing potential abuses of power by government entities, particularly in safeguarding democratic principles.
    • Recognition of Digital Regulation: While acknowledging the need to combat misinformation, the judgment insists on the importance of balanced regulation that respects free speech rights.

    Key Challenges:

    • Interpretation of Constitutional Rights: Balancing free speech with the need for regulation presents a challenge in defining clear and reasonable restrictions.
    • Enforcement and Compliance: Ensuring compliance with constitutional principles and judicial decisions poses challenges in a dynamic digital landscape.
    • Government Response: The government’s response to judicial decisions and its commitment to upholding constitutional principles may vary, influencing the effectiveness of legal interventions.

    Main Terms or key terms for answer writing:

    • Free Speech
    • Constitutional Guarantee
    • Social Media Regulation
    • Arbitrary Censorship
    • Judicial Review
    • Fundamental Rights
    • Digital Platforms
    • Misinformation
    • Democratic Principles

    Important Phrases for good marks in mains:

    • “The sacrosanctity of the inviolate constitutional guarantee of free speech”
    • “Vague and overbroad”
    • “The imperative of combatting fakery and misinformation”
    • “A bulwark against the excesses of majoritarian assemblies”
    • “Agents of injustice”
    • “Inter-institutional comity”

    Quotes that you can use in essay for value addition:

    • “The cacophony of dissent and disagreement is the symphony of a democracy at work.”
    • “Falsehood flies, and truth comes limping after it.”
    • “The will of the State is subject to scrutiny by those affected by the exercise of State power.”
    • “Democratic power is a trust held upon conditions.”

    Useful Statements for value addition:

    • “The decision reaffirms the constitutional conscience and rejects the potential for wanton abuse of power.”
    • “Fear-instilled stillness ill serves the case of a vibrant democracy.”
    • “A law that permits its enforcers to become agents of injustice cannot be countenanced in a constitutional democracy.”

    Examples and References:

    Facts and Data for value addition and credibility to your arguments:

    • Mention of the amended Rule 3(1)(b)(v) of the IT Rules 2021.
    • Reference to Justice Patel’s decision on the Kunal Kamra’s case, dated 31st January.

    Critical Analysis:

    Justice Patel’s decision serves as a significant safeguard against potential abuses of power and underscores the importance of upholding free speech in the digital age. By rejecting arbitrary censorship and emphasizing the need for clear, reasonable restrictions, the judgment sets a crucial precedent for protecting democratic principles.

    Way Forward:

    • Ensure compliance with constitutional principles in regulating digital platforms.
    • Encourage balanced regulation that combats misinformation while respecting free speech rights.
    • Foster inter-institutional comity by heeding judicial decisions and promoting democratic accountability.

    By adhering to these principles, policymakers can navigate the complexities of digital regulation while upholding fundamental rights and democratic values.

    Improve your answer writing with us and crack the mains 

    Try to attempt following question and write the answer in comment box below

    1. How does Justice Patel’s decision in the Kunal Kamra’s case uphold the constitutional right to free speech?
    2. What are the key challenges in balancing free speech with the need for regulation, as highlighted in the judgment?
    3. How does the judgment emphasize the importance of judicial review in safeguarding democratic principles in the digital age?

  • An intervention that will help strengthen legal education

    The present scenario of legal education in India - iPleaders

    Central Idea:

    The article discusses the recent recommendations made by the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Personnel, Public Grievances, Law, and Justice to enhance the quality of legal education in India. It highlights the need for a new regulatory body, the National Council for Legal Education and Research (NCLER), to oversee post-graduation level education, prioritize research in law schools, and address the challenges hindering the excellence of legal education in the country.

    Key Highlights:

    • Recommendations for Regulatory Reform: The committee proposes limiting the Bar Council of India’s (BCI) role in legal education regulation and establishing the NCLER to set qualitative benchmarks for post-graduation level education.
    • Emphasis on Research: Recognizing the deficiency in research focus among Indian law schools, the committee stresses the importance of promoting research to improve teaching outcomes and cultivate critical thinking skills among students.
    • Global Perspective: Acknowledging the impact of globalization on legal education, the committee suggests incorporating global curriculum, international exchange programs, and more international law courses to prepare students for a globalizing world.
    • Call for Strong Leadership and Academic Freedom: The article emphasizes the necessity for passionate and visionary academic leaders in law faculties and universities to foster a supportive environment for faculty and promote academic freedom.

    Key Challenges:

    • Lack of Leadership: The absence of effective leadership in law faculties and universities impedes efforts to achieve excellence in legal education.
    • Insufficient Research Focus: Many law schools in India prioritize teaching over research, resulting in a scarcity of indigenous legal knowledge and reliance on Western legal literature.
    • Resistance to Change: Implementing reforms in legal education requires a shift in mindset among stakeholders and a commitment to prioritize higher education.

    Main Terms or key quotes:

    • National Council for Legal Education and Research (NCLER)
    • Bar Council of India (BCI)
    • Globalization
    • Academic Freedom

    Important Phrases for mains answer enrichment:

    • “Sea of institutionalized mediocrity”
    • “Consumer of legal knowledge generated in the West”
    • “Augmenting the research ecosystem”
    • “Complete academic freedom and autonomy”

    Quotes for quality essay:

    • Albert Einstein: “The value of a college education is not the learning of many facts but the training of the mind to think.”
    • Jawaharlal Nehru: “A university stands for humanism, for tolerance, for reason, for the adventure of ideas and for the search of truth.”

    Useful Statements:

    • “Legal education in India needs regulatory reform to address its current shortcomings and enhance its quality.”
    • “Promoting research is crucial to improving teaching outcomes and fostering critical thinking skills among students.”
    • “Effective leadership and academic freedom are essential for driving meaningful change in legal education.”

    Examples and References:

    • National Law School of India University and Jindal Global Law School are among the few Indian law schools ranked in the top 250 globally.
    • Out of over 800 law journals indexed in Scopus, only a handful are from India, indicating the low level of research output from Indian law schools.

    Facts and Data:

    • India has over 1,700 law schools, but only a few have achieved excellence in legal education.
    • Legal education in India has historically lagged behind fields like medicine and engineering in terms of priority and investment.

    Critical Analysis:

    The article aptly highlights the systemic challenges plaguing legal education in India and the urgent need for reform. It identifies regulatory deficiencies, research gaps, and leadership issues as key barriers to achieving excellence. However, it fails to delve deeply into the specific strategies or mechanisms required to address these challenges.

    Way Forward:

    • Implement the recommendations of the Parliamentary Standing Committee to establish the NCLER and redefine the role of the BCI.
    • Invest in promoting research culture in law schools through funding, infrastructure, and academic support.
    • Encourage academic leadership that fosters a culture of innovation, excellence, and academic freedom.
    • Foster collaboration between law schools, industry, and international institutions to enhance curriculum relevance and global exposure for students.

    In conclusion, while the recommendations put forth by the committee represent a step in the right direction, concerted efforts from all stakeholders are necessary to bring about meaningful change and elevate the quality of legal education in India.

  • Places of worship and an unsettling judicial silence

    Supreme Court to hear Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid title dispute on January 4 | India News - The Indian Express

    Central Idea:

    The article discusses the aftermath of the Supreme Court verdict on the Babri Masjid case in November 2019 and its implications on the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991. It highlights the challenges posed by the resurgence of petitions targeting mosques like the Gyanvapi Masjid in Varanasi and the Shahi Idgah in Mathura, and the subsequent debates on the Act’s validity and applicability. It emphasizes the need for the Supreme Court to intervene to protect the integrity of the Act and prevent its politicization.

    Key Highlights:

    • Supreme Court’s verdict on the Babri Masjid case in November 2019 praised the Places of Worship Act, 1991 for preserving the religious character of places of worship as of August 15, 1947.
    • Hindutva forces initiated petitions targeting mosques in Mathura, Varanasi, and other places, challenging their status and calling for their liberation.
    • Despite lack of concrete evidence, petitions against mosques were admitted in various district courts, signaling a deliberate challenge to the Places of Worship Act.
    • The Supreme Court’s silence on the increasing challenges to the Act raised concerns about its integrity and enforcement.
    • The court’s decision to hear petitions against the Act itself and the Union government’s delays in specifying its stance raised doubts about the Act’s future.

    Key Challenges:

    • Increasing petitions challenging the status of mosques threaten communal harmony and challenge the secular principles enshrined in the Indian Constitution.
    • The politicization of the issue, with petitions being used as a tool to further certain political narratives, adds complexity to the debate.
    • Delays in the Supreme Court’s intervention and the government’s ambiguity on the Act’s status create uncertainty and erode public trust in the legal system.
    • Historical grievances and communal tensions fuel the resurgence of demands for the reclamation of religious sites.

    Main Terms or key words:

    • Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991: Legislation preserving the religious character of places of worship as of August 15, 1947, and prohibiting their conversion.
    • Hindutva: Ideology promoting Hindu nationalism.
    • Communal Harmony: Peaceful coexistence and cooperation among different religious communities.
    • Secularism: Principle of separating religion from state affairs and ensuring equal treatment of all religions.
    • Petitions: Formal requests submitted to a court seeking legal action or remedy.

    Important Phrases for mains value addition:

    • “Non-retrogression as an essential feature of our secular values.”
    • “Challenges to the Act amount to a breach of public trust.”
    • “The politicization of petitions serves certain political narratives.”
    • “The silence of the top court is unsettling.”

    Quotes for quality enrichment of mains answers:

    • “The Places of Worship Act imposes a non-derogable obligation towards enforcing our commitment to secularism under the Indian Constitution.”
    • “Similarly minded people are as little likely to be deterred by the provisions of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act 1991.”
    • “The ascertainment of the religious character of a place as a procedural instrument may not necessarily fall foul of the provisions of sections 3 and 4 of the Act of 1991.”

    Anecdotes:

    • The order of a district court in Uttar Pradesh in 1986 kick-started events leading to the destruction of the Babri Masjid, illustrating the significance of legal decisions regarding places of worship.

    Useful Statements:

    • The resurgence of demands for the reclamation of religious sites threatens communal harmony and challenges secular principles.
    • The Supreme Court’s intervention is crucial to uphold the integrity of the Places of Worship Act and prevent its politicization.

    Examples and References:

    • Petitions targeting mosques in Mathura, Varanasi, and other places highlight the growing challenges to the Places of Worship Act.
    • The Babri Masjid-Ramjanambhoomi agitation and slogans like “Ayodhya to jhanki hai, Kashi, Mathura baqi hai” demonstrate historical grievances and communal tensions.

    Facts and Data:

    • The Places of Worship Act, 1991, preserves the religious character of places of worship as of August 15, 1947.
    • The Supreme Court admitted petitions challenging the Act’s validity and the government’s delays in specifying its stance.

    Critical Analysis:

    The article provides a comprehensive overview of the challenges posed by petitions targeting mosques and questioning the Places of Worship Act, 1991. It emphasizes the importance of preserving communal harmony and secular principles while addressing historical grievances. However, it also highlights the politicization of the issue and the need for timely intervention by the Supreme Court to prevent further escalation.

    Way Forward:

    • The Supreme Court should actively intervene to uphold the integrity of the Places of Worship Act and prevent its politicization.
    • Political leaders and stakeholders should prioritize communal harmony and refrain from using religious sentiments for political gain.
    • Civil society should promote dialogue and understanding among different religious communities to prevent communal tensions.
    • The government should clarify its stance on the Act and ensure its effective implementation to maintain secularism and protect religious freedoms.

  • Four issues that CJI highlighted within Legal Profession

    cji

    Introduction

    • During the Supreme Court’s 75th-year Foundation Day address, the Chief Justice of India (CJI) highlighted four crucial issues within the judiciary that require “difficult conversations.”
    • This article delves into these issues and their historical context.

    Major Issues with Legal Profession

    [1] Problem of “Adjournment Culture”

    • Definition: Adjournment culture refers to the practice of lawyers repeatedly seeking adjournments, delaying scheduled hearings.
    • Effect on Justice: Prolonged adjournments lead to case delays and contribute to the growing backlog of pending cases.
    • Legal Framework: Order XVII of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 sets rules for granting adjournments, limiting them to three times, with sufficient cause shown.
    • Vicious Cycle: Advocates exploit heavy workloads to seek adjournments, perpetuating delays.

    [2] Managing Lengthy Oral Arguments

    • Constitutional Bench Matters: The court directs parties to schedule oral arguments to avoid repetition in important cases.
    • Mixed Success: Past cases, like the Ayodhya title dispute, had lengthy hearings despite scheduling.
    • Recent Improvements: Under CJI UU Lalit, a Constitution Bench case involving EWS reservations achieved efficiency through time scheduling.
    • US Model: The US Supreme Court restricts oral arguments to 30 minutes per side, considered but not adopted in India.

    [3] Alternatives to Extended Court Vacations

    • Flexi-Time: Introducing flexi-time for lawyers and judges is suggested, allowing them to choose working hours within a specified total.
    • Philippines Example: The Philippines implemented flexi-time for court employees based on valid reasons.
    • Historical Suggestions: Past reports and government recommendations aimed to reduce court vacations to tackle case backlog.
    • Supreme Court Rules: In 2014, the court limited summer vacations to seven weeks instead of ten.

    [4] Ensuring Equal Opportunities for First-Generation Lawyers

    • Leveling the Field: The CJI emphasizes providing a level playing field for first-generation lawyers and marginalized segments with the potential to succeed.
    • Progress: Over 50% of junior civil judge exam candidates are women, and 41% of Supreme Court law clerk candidates are women.
    • Inclusivity Efforts: Initiatives by the Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association (SCAORA) aim to support diversity, including giving weightage to first-generation lawyers for Senior Advocate designations.
    • Judicial Recognition: The judiciary acknowledges the growth and contributions of first-generation lawyers, dismissing claims that recognition is solely based on wealth and proximity.

    Conclusion

    • The judiciary faces multifaceted challenges, including adjournment culture, oral argument lengths, court vacations, and ensuring a fair platform for first-generation lawyers.
    • Addressing these issues requires frank discussions, reforms, and continued efforts to uphold the principles of justice and inclusivity within the legal profession.

  • Diamond Jubilee celebrations of the Supreme Court

    Introduction

    • The Prime Minister inaugurated the diamond jubilee year celebrations of the Supreme Court, marking an important milestone in India’s judicial history.

    About Supreme Court of India

    • Apex Judicial Body: The Supreme Court of India is the highest judicial authority as per the Constitution of India.
    • Constitutional Mandate: Article 124 of the Constitution stipulates the establishment of the Supreme Court.
    • Birth of the Supreme Court: The Supreme Court came into being on January 26, 1950, coinciding with the commencement of the Indian Constitution.
    • Inauguration: Two days after India became a Sovereign Democratic Republic, the Supreme Court was officially inaugurated on January 28, 1950.
    • Initial Location: Initially, the Supreme Court operated from the old Parliament House until it relocated to its present site on Tilak Marg, New Delhi, in 1958.
    • Inaugural Event: The inaugural ceremony of the current Supreme Court building was presided over by Dr. Rajendra Prasad, the first President of India, on August 4, 1958.

    Evolution of Judicial Bench Strength

    • Changing Dynamics: The original 1950 Constitution envisioned a Supreme Court comprising a Chief Justice and 7 puisne Judges, allowing Parliament to alter this number.
    • Progressive Growth: Over the years, the number of Judges increased to accommodate the growing workload: 8 in 1950, 11 in 1956, 14 in 1960, 18 in 1978, 26 in 1986, 31 in 2009, and the current strength of 34 Judges.
    • Judicial Structure: Judges sit in panels of two or three and convene in larger benches of 5 or more, known as Constitution Benches, to resolve conflicting decisions between different Supreme Court benches or address significant constitutional interpretations.
    • Official Language: Proceedings in the Supreme Court are conducted exclusively in English.

    Powers and Jurisdiction

    • Multifaceted Jurisdiction: The Supreme Court possesses original, appellate, and advisory jurisdiction.
    • Final Arbiter: It serves as the ultimate court of appeal and the ultimate interpreter of the Constitution.
    • Original Jurisdiction: The Supreme Court’s original jurisdiction extends to disputes involving the Government of India and one or more States, inter-State disputes, and issues related to Fundamental Rights.
    • Writ Jurisdiction: Article 32 of the Constitution empowers the Supreme Court with extensive original jurisdiction to enforce Fundamental Rights by issuing writs like habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto, and certiorari.
    • Inter-High Court Cases: The Supreme Court can direct the transfer of civil or criminal cases between High Courts.
    • International Commercial Arbitration: Under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the Supreme Court can initiate International Commercial Arbitration.
    • Appellate Authority: High Courts can grant certificates for appeals to the Supreme Court under Article 132(1), 133(1), or 134 in cases with substantial questions of constitutional interpretation.
    • Certified Appeals: In civil cases, High Courts may certify that a case involves a significant question of general importance, warranting Supreme Court adjudication.
    • Criminal Appeals: In criminal cases, appeals lie to the Supreme Court if the High Court has reversed an acquittal, sentenced an accused to death, imprisonment for life, or imprisonment for over 10 years, or if the High Court certifies the case’s suitability for Supreme Court appeal.
    • Parliamentary Empowerment: Parliament can confer additional powers on the Supreme Court to hear appeals from High Courts in criminal proceedings.
    • Special Leave to Appeal: Under Article 136, the Supreme Court may, at its discretion, grant special leave to appeal from any judgment, decree, or order passed by any Court or Tribunal in India.
    • Advisory Role: The Supreme Court exercises advisory jurisdiction under Article 143, wherein the President of India can refer specific matters to the Court.
    • Election Petitions: Part III of the Presidential and Vice-Presidential Elections Act, 1952, allows direct filing of election petitions in the Supreme Court.
    • Contempt Powers: Articles 129 and 142 empower the Supreme Court to punish for contempt of Court, including self-contempt.
    • Curative Petitions: After dismissing a review petition, the Supreme Court can reconsider its final judgment through a curative petition on limited grounds.
    • Binding Authority: As India’s highest court, its judgments are binding on all other courts in the country.

    Location of the Supreme Court

    • Article 130: Article 130 of the Constitution grants the Chief Justice of India the authority to choose the location of the Supreme Court, which can be in Delhi or any other place.
    • CJI’s Discretion: The Article vests exclusive discretionary powers with the Chief Justice of India regarding the Supreme Court’s location.
    • No External Compulsion: No external authority can compel the Chief Justice to act in a particular manner under this Article.

    Advocating for Circuit Benches

    • Law Commission Recommendation: The Law Commission’s 229th Report suggested establishing a Constitution Bench in New Delhi and four other benches in different regions of India.
    • Diverging Views: However, this proposal did not garner favor among Supreme Court Judges.

  • Judicial contradiction in Delhi Chief Secretary’s extension

    Robert H. Jackson quote: There is danger that, if the Court does not temper...

    Central Idea:

    The article criticizes the Supreme Court of India’s November 2023 judgment allowing a six-month extension to Delhi’s Chief Secretary despite serious corruption allegations. It highlights the Court’s perceived inconsistency in upholding constitutional principles, particularly concerning the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi (Amendment) Act 2023, and expresses concerns about the erosion of constitutional logic and past judicial wisdom.

    Key Highlights:

    • The Supreme Court’s decision to permit the extension of Delhi’s Chief Secretary’s tenure is viewed as an instance of judicial self-abnegation.
    • The article questions the Court’s reversal of its own earlier Services judgment, which emphasized the elected government’s control over services in Delhi.
    • Serious corruption charges against the Chief Secretary and the Delhi Chief Minister’s recommendation for his removal create a conflict of interest.
    • The Court’s reliance on the 2023 amendment and the interpretation of the Chief Secretary’s role is criticized for being inconsistent with past rulings, including Royappa.
    • The article points out the Court’s failure to acknowledge that the 2023 amendment did not exclude the application of the Royappa case.

    Key Challenges:

    • The Supreme Court’s perceived inconsistency in interpreting constitutional principles, especially regarding the Chief Secretary’s extension and the 2023 amendment.
    • Addressing the conflict of interest posed by serious allegations against the Chief Secretary and the breakdown of trust between the elected government and bureaucracy.
    • The Court’s deviation from its past rulings, particularly the Services judgment and Royappa case, creates a challenge in maintaining a coherent judicial stance.

    Key Terms/Phrases:

    • Judicial self-abnegation
    • Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi (Amendment) Act 2023
    • Constitutional logic
    • Chief Secretary’s extension
    • Services judgment
    • Royappa case
    • Conflict of interest
    • Constitutional interpretation
    • Erosion of trust
    • Unilateral extension

    Key Quotes:

    • “The Court’s judgments become ‘writ in water’ when it reverses its own reasoning for the government’s convenience.”
    • “The Court has lost sight of constitutional logic and past wisdom that attributed great value to constitutional interpretation.”

    Key Statements:

    • “The article questions the Court’s deviation from its earlier stance, leading to a perceived erosion of constitutional principles and inconsistency.”
    • “The conflict of interest arising from serious charges against the Chief Secretary and the breakdown of trust between the elected government and bureaucracy is a significant concern.”

    Key Examples/References:

    • The Supreme Court’s November 2023 judgment permitting the Chief Secretary’s extension and its reliance on the 2023 amendment.
    • The Services judgment emphasizing the elected government’s control over services and the Royappa case defining the role of the Chief Secretary.

    Key Facts/Data:

    • The Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi (Amendment) Act 2023 had been challenged by the Delhi government but was not stayed by the courts.
    • Serious allegations of corruption against the Chief Secretary and the Chief Minister’s recommendation for immediate removal.

    Critical Analysis:

    The article critically examines the Supreme Court’s handling of the Chief Secretary’s extension, highlighting perceived inconsistencies, conflicts with past judgments, and a departure from established constitutional principles. It raises concerns about the erosion of trust between the elected government and bureaucracy.

    Way Forward:

    • The Supreme Court needs to revisit and reconcile its past judgments, especially the Services and Royappa cases, to ensure a coherent judicial stance.
    • Addressing conflicts of interest and corruption allegations in bureaucratic appointments is crucial for maintaining public trust.
    • The Court should uphold constitutional principles consistently, considering the broader impact on governance and accountability.
    • Future decisions related to the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi (Amendment) Act 2023 should be made with a clear understanding of constitutional logic and democratic principles.

  • Justice for Bilkis Bano, questions on remission

    A New Beginning : Bilkis Bano on the SC Ruling Nullifying Guj Govt's Remission Order - Read What

    Central Idea:

    The article discusses a recent Supreme Court decision regarding the remission of 11 convicts in the Bilkis Bano case. It highlights the court’s condemnation of illegalities and collusion between the petitioners and the Gujarat government. While celebrating the decision as a triumph for justice, the author also raises concerns about the lack of transparency and unchecked discretion in the remission process.

    Key Highlights:

    • The Supreme Court cancels remission orders for 11 convicts due to fraud and collusion with the Gujarat government.
    • The decision is praised for upholding the rule of law and addressing the exceptional injustice faced by Bilkis Bano.
    • The article acknowledges the inspiring resilience of Bilkis Bano and applauds women’s rights lawyers for their commitment.

    Key Challenges:

    • Lack of transparency in the formation and decision-making process of remission committees.
    • Unchecked discretion and potential for arbitrary exercise of power in remission decisions.
    • Concerns about non-application of mind and identical orders in the remission process, as seen in the Bilkis Bano case.

    Key Terms:

    • Remission: Reduction of sentence through earned days based on rehabilitation activities.
    • Per incuriam: Declared as illegal due to a mistake or oversight.
    • Retributive punishment: Focused on punishment rather than rehabilitation.
    • Judicial review: Examination of a decision for legality and fairness.
    • Usurpation of power: Unauthorized assumption of authority.

    Key Phrases:

    • “Injustice of exceptionalism”: Describes the grant of remission in the Bilkis Bano case as a unique and unjust situation.
    • “Resilience that prevailed”: Commends Bilkis Bano’s enduring strength in the face of injustice.
    • “Soothing balm”: Refers to the comfort provided by the Supreme Court’s firm decision.
    • “Unchecked discretion”: Highlights the potential for arbitrary decision-making in remission cases.

    Key Quotes:

    • “Rule of law and equality before the law would be empty words if their violation is not a matter of judicial scrutiny.”
    • “Remission is rooted in the logic that prisons are meant to be rehabilitative spaces.”
    • “Justice Nagarathna’s words come as solace in light of the disturbing memory of the celebrations that followed the release of the 11 convicts.”

    Key Examples and References:

    • Bilkis Bano case: Illustrates the background of the Supreme Court decision and the injustices faced by the victim.
    • Union of India vs V. Sriharan (2015): Reference to a Constitution Bench decision on the appropriate government for remission.
    • Epuru Sudhakar vs State of Andhra Pradesh (2006): Supreme Court ruling on the judicial review of remission orders.

    Key Facts and Data:

    • Life convicts must serve a minimum of 14 years before applying for remission.
    • Remission policies in some states deny opportunities based on crime categories.
    • The Gujarat government’s remission orders for the 11 convicts were identical.

    Critical Analysis:

    The article raises concerns about the arbitrary exercise of power in remission decisions, citing the lack of transparency and identical orders in the Bilkis Bano case. It prompts a reflection on whether certain offenders should be ineligible for remission or if a focus on fair compliance with conditions is more appropriate.

    Way Forward:

    • Advocate for increased transparency in the formation and functioning of remission committees.
    • Emphasize the importance of considering individual circumstances and compliance with remission conditions.
    • Encourage a reevaluation of remission policies to avoid blanket denials based on crime categories.
    • Address the issue of unchecked discretion to ensure a fair and rehabilitative approach in the remission process.

  • Curb the disillusionment with the traditional rule of law

    Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) upsc | What is the need for Bharatiya Nyaya Samhita and related reforms?

    Central Idea:

    • The article explores challenges to the credibility of the rule of law, emphasizing the delicate balance between traditional norms and modern adaptations.
    • Recent legal reforms in India, particularly the Jan Vishwas Act, are discussed, along with concerns about potential abuses of power through shortcuts in law enforcement.

    Key Highlights:

    • The article underscores the significance of faith in the inherent goodness of legal norms for trust in the rule of law.
    • Discussion on the Jan Vishwas Act addressing outdated laws to facilitate business activities and reduce compliance burdens.
    • Replacement of colonial-era laws with the Bharatiya Nyaya (Second) Sanhita to modernize legal thinking and rebuild credibility.
    • The credibility crisis is attributed to shifts in perceptions of law as a power resource and the adoption of shortcut methods in law enforcement.

    Key Challenges:

    • Potential misuse of power through encounters and ‘bulldozer’ methods without democratic checks and balances.
    • Concerns about the crude nature of an abridged rule of law, leading to arbitrary justice and unpredictability.

    Key Terms:

    • Jan Vishwas Act
    • Bharatiya Nyaya (Second) Sanhita
    • Credibility crisis
    • Shortcut or abridged rule of law model

    Key Phrases:

    • “Normative raison d’etre” – referring to the fundamental basis or justification of norms.
    • “Smart governance” – addressing infirmities and outdatedness in laws through effective governance.
    • “Encounter killings” and “bulldozer action” – methods of law enforcement discussed in the article.

    Key Quotes:

    • “Fear of imprisonment for minor offences is a major factor hampering the growth of the business ecosystem.”
    • “The real credibility crisis of the rule of law is located not so much at the normative level but at the level of the rule of law reality.”

    Key Statements:

    • Acknowledgment of the government’s faith in the traditional rule of law as a positive aspect.
    • Highlighting the dangers of growing reliance on shortcut or abridged rule of law models.

    Key Examples and References:

    • The Dandi March as an example of civil disobedience against an unjust law.
    • Instances of police encounters and ‘bulldozer’ actions leading to potential abuses of power.

    Key Facts:

    • The Jan Vishwas Act addressed changes in numerous central Acts, including the Indian Post Office Act, and the Cinematograph Act.
    • Replacement of colonial-era Indian Penal Code, Code of Criminal Procedure, and Indian Evidence Act in the second phase.

    Critical Analysis:

    • The article critically examines the evolving landscape of the rule of law, highlighting potential challenges and consequences of shortcut methods in law enforcement. It questions the credibility crisis and emphasizes the importance of maintaining faith in traditional norms.

    Way Forward:

    • The article suggests staying alert to the dangers of shortcut or abridged rule of law models.
    • Encouragement to continue faith in the traditional rule of law while acknowledging the need for necessary reforms.