Unit 3:

Judicial Process under the Constitution:

The judicial process under the Constitution of India is a key component
of the country's legal system. It is designed to ensure the rule of law,
protect fundamental rights, and provide a mechanism for the resolution
of disputes. Here are some key aspects of the judicial process under the
Constitution:
1. Separation of Powers:
 The Constitution establishes a separation of powers among
the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of
government.
 The judiciary, including the Supreme Court and various High
Courts, is entrusted with the responsibility of interpreting
the laws and ensuring their constitutionality.
2. Supreme Court of India:
 The Supreme Court is the highest judicial authority in the
country.
 It has original, appellate, and advisory jurisdiction, and its
decisions are binding on all courts within India.
 The Chief Justice of India is the head of the Supreme Court.
3. High Courts:
 Each state in India has a High Court, and some Union
Territories also have High Courts.
 High Courts have jurisdiction over their respective states or
territories.
4. Lower Courts:
 Below the High Courts, there are subordinate or lower
courts, including district courts and magistrate courts, which
handle civil and criminal cases at the district and local levels.
5. Appointment of Judges:
 Judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts are appointed
by the President of India.
 The process involves consultation with the Chief Justice of
India and other judges.
6. Independence of the Judiciary:
 The Constitution ensures the independence of the judiciary
to protect it from undue influence or interference from the
executive or legislative branches.
7. Protection of Fundamental Rights:
 The judiciary plays a crucial role in safeguarding the
fundamental rights of citizens as enshrined in the
Constitution.
 Citizens can approach the courts through writ petitions for
the enforcement of their fundamental rights.
8. Advisory Jurisdiction:
 The President of India can seek the Supreme Court's opinion
on constitutional matters under its advisory jurisdiction.
9. Judicial Review:
  The judiciary has the power of judicial review, enabling it to
review and strike down laws or government actions
inconsistent with the Constitution.
10. Public Interest Litigation (PIL):
 The judiciary allows individuals or groups to approach the court in
public interest matters through Public Interest Litigation, seeking
remedies for violations of legal rights or social justice issues.
The judicial process in India, shaped by the Constitution, is vital for
upholding the rule of law, protecting individual rights, and ensuring
justice for all citizens. The principles of fairness, independence, and
constitutional supremacy guide the functioning of the judiciary in the
country.
The Union Judiciary - The Supreme Court:
The Supreme Court of India stands as the pinnacle of the Union
Judiciary, holding a position of paramount importance in the legal and
constitutional framework of the nation. Its establishment, structure,
jurisdiction, and role in upholding the rule of law collectively define its
significance in the Indian polity.
Constitutional Foundation:
The foundation of the Supreme Court is laid out in Article 124 of the
Indian Constitution. This pivotal provision vests the power to establish
and constitute the Supreme Court in Parliament, shaping the highest
court as an integral part of the country's governance. The Constitution
envisions the Supreme Court as the ultimate arbiter, entrusted with the
responsibility of interpreting the Constitution, adjudicating legal
disputes, and safeguarding the fundamental rights of citizens.
Composition and Appointment of Judges:
The Supreme Court is composed of a Chief Justice of India (CJI) and, as
determined by Parliament, a maximum of 34 judges. The appointment
of judges to the Supreme Court is a process carefully outlined in the
Constitution. The President of India appoints judges, relying on the
recommendations of a collegium system. This collegium, led by the CJI
and including senior judges, ensures that judicial appointments are
made based on merit, legal expertise, and a commitment to justice. The
collegium system represents a significant evolution in the judicial
appointment process, emphasizing the judiciary's role in maintaining its
independence.
Jurisdiction:
The Supreme Court exercises a multifaceted jurisdiction that
underscores its role as the final court of appeal. In its original
jurisdiction, the Supreme Court adjudicates disputes between the
Union and one or more states or between states. Its appellate
jurisdiction extends to civil and criminal matters, and its decisions
create binding precedents on all courts within India. Additionally, the
Supreme Court holds advisory jurisdiction, providing opinions to the
President on questions of law or fact.
Role in Safeguarding Rights:
The Supreme Court is the ultimate guardian of the Constitution and
plays a crucial role in safeguarding the fundamental rights of citizens.
Through the power of judicial review, the court ensures that laws and
government actions conform to constitutional principles. Citizens can
approach the Supreme Court directly through writ petitions to seek
remedies for violations of their fundamental rights, establishing the
court as a bulwark against arbitrary state actions.
Doctrine of Stare Decisis:
The doctrine of stare decisis, although not as rigidly applied in India as
in some other legal systems, holds significance in the Supreme Court's
decision-making process. Stare decisis, meaning "to stand by things
decided," implies that the court should follow precedents and uphold
prior decisions. While the court retains the flexibility to depart from
precedent under certain circumstances, the doctrine contributes to
consistency and predictability in legal outcomes.
In conclusion, the Supreme Court of India, as the apex judicial authority
in the Union Judiciary, plays a pivotal role in shaping the legal
landscape, interpreting the Constitution, and safeguarding the rights
and liberties of the citizens. Its constitutional mandate, coupled with its
commitment to justice, renders it a cornerstone of India's democratic
governance.

Constitution of the Supreme Court:

The Supreme Court of India, established under Article 124 of the Indian
Constitution, holds a paramount position in the country's judiciary.
Envisioned as the ultimate guardian of justice, the Constitution carefully
delineates the structure and composition of the Supreme Court.
Article 124 lays down the framework for the Supreme Court, comprising
a Chief Justice of India (CJI) and, if deemed necessary, a maximum of 34
judges. The actual number of judges is determined by Parliament,
allowing for flexibility in response to the evolving needs of the judicial
system. This composition ensures a collegial and diverse bench, bringing
together legal minds with varying expertise.
The appointment of judges to the Supreme Court is a meticulous
process governed by the principles of independence and judicial
integrity. The President of India appoints judges based on the
recommendations of a collegium system. This system, evolved through
judicial interpretations, involves the CJI and a group of senior judges.
The collegium carefully scrutinizes the suitability of candidates,
emphasizing their legal acumen, integrity, and commitment to justice.
The Constitution thus provides a robust foundation for the Supreme
Court, ensuring a balance between judicial independence and
accountability to the democratic principles enshrined in the
Constitution.
Next, let's explore the topic of the Appointment of Judges:
Appointment of Judges:
The appointment of judges to the Supreme Court is a crucial aspect of
maintaining the independence and integrity of the judiciary. This
process, defined by the Constitution and evolved through judicial
pronouncements, reflects a delicate balance between the executive and
the judiciary.
Article 124(2) empowers the President of India to appoint judges to the
Supreme Court. However, the procedure for this appointment has
undergone significant changes over the years. The collegium system,
not explicitly provided in the Constitution but developed through
judicial interpretations, plays a central role in recommending candidates
for judicial appointments.
The collegium, headed by the Chief Justice of India (CJI) and comprising
a group of senior judges, assesses the suitability of candidates for
elevation to the Supreme Court. The collegium system is an
embodiment of the judiciary's self-regulatory mechanism, ensuring that
judicial appointments are made based on merit, legal acumen, and a
commitment to upholding constitutional values.
The process of judicial appointment involves a thorough evaluation of
the candidate's professional competence, legal experience, and
adherence to ethical standards. The collegium's recommendations are
typically binding on the executive, promoting judicial independence and
insulating the judiciary from undue political interference.
In conclusion, the appointment of judges to the Supreme Court is a
meticulous and constitutionally guided process designed to uphold the
principles of an independent and impartial judiciary.

Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court:

The jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of India is multifaceted,
encompassing original, appellate, and advisory powers. These extensive
powers position the Supreme Court as the final court of appeal,
ensuring its pivotal role in the administration of justice and the
interpretation of the Constitution.
In its original jurisdiction, the Supreme Court has the authority to hear
disputes directly, without them having been heard by any other court.
This jurisdiction extends to matters involving the Union and one or
more states or disputes between states. The Supreme Court acts as an
adjudicator in these cases, providing a forum for the resolution of
complex disputes between different entities within the Indian federal
structure.
The appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court is perhaps its most
invoked function. It serves as the highest court of appeal in civil and
criminal matters, hearing appeals from various High Courts and other
tribunals. The decisions rendered by the Supreme Court in these
matters become binding precedents, establishing legal principles that
guide lower courts throughout the country. This appellate jurisdiction
contributes significantly to the development of a unified and coherent
legal framework.
Additionally, the Supreme Court exercises advisory jurisdiction,
allowing the President of India to seek the court's opinion on questions
of law or fact. While not as frequently invoked as other forms of
jurisdiction, this advisory function highlights the court's role as a
constitutional advisor, providing expert opinions on matters of national
importance.
The expansive jurisdiction of the Supreme Court serves to harmonize
legal interpretations, promote consistency, and uphold the rule of law.
Its decisions not only resolve specific disputes but also contribute to the
evolution of legal principles that govern the entire nation.

Doctrine of Stare Decisis:

The doctrine of stare decisis, Latin for "to stand by things decided," is a
legal principle that emphasizes the importance of precedent in judicial
decision-making. While the doctrine is not as rigidly applied in India as
it is in some other common law jurisdictions, it nonetheless plays a
significant role in shaping the jurisprudence of the Supreme Court.
Stare decisis implies that a court should follow precedents established
in previous cases. This adherence to precedent provides consistency
and predictability in legal decisions, fostering stability in the legal
system. However, the Supreme Court has clarified that it is not bound
by its own decisions and has the authority to depart from precedent
under certain circumstances.
The Supreme Court's approach to stare decisis involves a careful
consideration of the principles of justice, equity, and legal reasoning.
The court recognizes the need for flexibility in the application of
precedent, especially when confronted with evolving societal norms,
changing legal perspectives, or the necessity to correct legal errors.
While stare decisis is not an absolute rule, the Supreme Court often
considers its previous decisions as persuasive authority. The court's
decisions reflect a nuanced balance between respecting precedent and
adapting to the dynamic nature of law and society.
In essence, the doctrine of stare decisis underscores the importance of
consistency in legal decisions, while allowing for the evolution and
adaptation of legal principles to meet the ever-changing needs of
society. The Supreme Court, in navigating this delicate balance, ensures
that its decisions contribute not only to legal stability but also to the
progressive development of the law in India.
The State Judiciary:
The State Judiciary in India is an integral part of the country's legal
system, operating at the state and union territory levels. It plays a
crucial role in dispensing justice, interpreting laws, and safeguarding the
rights and liberties of individuals within the state's jurisdiction. Let's
delve into the key aspects of the State Judiciary in India.
Structure and Composition:
 Each state in India has its own High Court, serving as the apex
judicial authority within the state.
 Some Union Territories also have High Courts, while others may be
directly under the jurisdiction of a nearby state's High Court.
 The High Court is presided over by the Chief Justice, and the
number of judges varies based on the state's needs and caseload.
District and Subordinate Courts:
  Below the High Court, there is a hierarchy of district and
subordinate courts, which are situated at the district and local
levels.
 District Courts are presided over by District Judges, and
Subordinate Courts, which include Magistrate Courts, handle
cases at the grassroots level.
Appointments and Independence:
 Judges in the State Judiciary, including the High Court, are
appointed by the President of India in consultation with the
Governor of the state and the Chief Justice of India.
 The process of judicial appointments aims to ensure
independence and competence in the judiciary.
Jurisdiction:
 The State Judiciary has the authority to hear cases related to state
laws, civil and criminal matters, and disputes arising within the
geographical boundaries of the state.
 The High Court exercises appellate jurisdiction over decisions
made by lower courts and tribunals within the state.
Role in Upholding Rights:
 Similar to the Supreme Court at the national level, the State
Judiciary has a vital role in safeguarding fundamental rights
guaranteed by the Constitution.
 Citizens can approach the High Court directly through writ
petitions for the enforcement of their fundamental rights.
Administration of Justice:
  The State Judiciary is responsible for the administration of justice,
ensuring that laws are interpreted and applied consistently and
fairly.
 It plays a crucial role in resolving disputes, both civil and criminal,
through a fair and impartial legal process.
State Judicial Service:
 The recruitment of judges for the State Judiciary is conducted
through the State Judicial Service examinations.
 These examinations identify and select candidates for various
judicial positions, including magistrates and civil judges.
Relation with the Supreme Court:
 While the State Judiciary operates independently within its
jurisdiction, its decisions can be subject to review by the Supreme
Court through the process of appeal or through writ jurisdiction.
 The Supreme Court provides the final appellate authority in both
civil and criminal cases.
In summary, the State Judiciary is an essential component of India's
judicial system, ensuring access to justice at the state and local levels.
Its structure, functions, and commitment to upholding the rule of law
contribute significantly to the overall legal framework of the country.
The High Courts: Constitution and Role in the Indian Judicial System
The High Courts in India serve as the crucial intermediate tier in the
country's judicial structure, exercising jurisdiction over states and union
territories. Endowed with considerable powers, the High Courts play a
pivotal role in interpreting laws, adjudicating disputes, and safeguarding
the rights of individuals. Understanding the constitution of High Courts
is essential to appreciating their significance within the Indian legal
framework.
Constitution of High Courts:
The establishment and constitution of High Courts are enshrined in Part
VI of the Indian Constitution (Articles 214 to 231). Each state in India, as
well as some Union Territories, has its own High Court. The Constitution
provides for the appointment of a Chief Justice and such other judges as
determined by the President of India. The Chief Justice of a High Court
is appointed by the President in consultation with the Chief Justice of
India and the Governor of the state.
The number of judges in a High Court is not fixed by the Constitution
but is determined by the President based on factors such as the volume
of work and the pendency of cases. This flexibility allows for
adjustments to meet the specific needs of each state's judiciary.
Jurisdiction and Powers:
High Courts have original, appellate, and advisory jurisdiction. The
original jurisdiction allows them to hear cases directly, often involving
disputes between individuals or entities within the state or union
territory. Appellate jurisdiction empowers High Courts to hear appeals
from lower courts and tribunals within their territorial limits.
In addition to their judicial functions, High Courts have administrative
and supervisory roles over the lower judiciary within their jurisdiction.
They can issue writs, orders, or directions to enforce fundamental
rights, making them crucial protectors of constitutional liberties.
Appointment and Independence:
The process of appointing judges to High Courts involves consultation
between the Chief Justice of India, the Governor of the state, and the
President. This collegium system aims to maintain the independence
and integrity of the judiciary. Judges are appointed based on their legal
acumen, experience, and commitment to justice.
The Constitution ensures the security of High Court judges by providing
for their removal only through impeachment proceedings in Parliament,
ensuring independence from executive interference.
Role in Upholding Fundamental Rights:
High Courts play a vital role in upholding fundamental rights guaranteed
by the Constitution. Citizens can directly approach the High Court
through writ petitions, seeking remedies for violations of their
fundamental rights. This access to justice ensures that constitutional
liberties are not merely theoretical but have practical enforceability.
Relationship with the Supreme Court:
While High Courts operate within their respective states or union
territories, they are not entirely independent of the Supreme Court. The
decisions of High Courts can be appealed to the Supreme Court, which
has the final appellate authority. The Supreme Court also has the power
of judicial review over High Court decisions and can issue writs to
enforce fundamental rights.
In conclusion, the constitution and functioning of High Courts exemplify
the nuanced balance between federalism and a unified legal system in
India. High Courts serve as the guardians of justice, ensuring the
enforcement of laws and protection of fundamental rights at the state
and union territory levels. Their significance lies not only in their judicial
functions but also in their pivotal role in maintaining the rule of law and
upholding the constitutional values of the nation.
Appointment of Judges to High Courts:
The appointment of judges to High Courts in India is a process guided
by constitutional principles to ensure the independence and
impartiality of the judiciary. The Constitution of India, under Articles
124 and 217, outlines the procedure for appointing judges to the High
Courts. Here are the key aspects of the appointment process:
1. Consultation Process:
 The President of India appoints judges to High Courts.
However, the President is required to consult the Chief
Justice of India (CJI) in the case of appointments other than
the Chief Justice of the High Court.
 For the appointment of the Chief Justice of a High Court, the
President consults the CJI as well as the Governor of the
concerned state.
2. Collegium System:
 The process of judicial appointments, especially for High
Courts, follows the collegium system. The collegium consists
of the CJI and a group of senior judges.
 The collegium assesses the suitability of candidates based on
their legal acumen, integrity, and other relevant factors.
3. Recommendations to the President:
 After due deliberation, the collegium recommends names
for judicial appointments to the President.
 The President is expected to accept these recommendations,
and the appointment is formalized through a presidential
warrant.
4. Judicial Independence:
  The collegium system is designed to insulate the judiciary
from undue influence by the executive.
 It ensures that appointments are made based on merit and
judicial competence, contributing to the independence of
the judiciary.
5. Impeachment Process:
 High Court judges, once appointed, can only be removed
through the impeachment process, as outlined in Article
124(4) of the Constitution.
 Impeachment requires a motion in either House of
Parliament, followed by an inquiry and approval by a special
majority.
The appointment process, with its emphasis on consultation, collegial
decision-making, and protection against arbitrary removal, contributes
to the credibility and independence of the judiciary.

Jurisdiction of the High Courts:

The High Courts in India exercise a wide range of jurisdiction, covering
both civil and criminal matters, along with their administrative and
advisory roles. Understanding the scope of their jurisdiction is essential
to grasp their significance within the legal system:
1. Original Jurisdiction:
 High Courts have original jurisdiction to hear certain cases
directly, especially those involving constitutional issues,
disputes between states and the center, or disputes within
their territorial jurisdiction.
2. Appellate Jurisdiction:
 A significant portion of the High Courts' workload comes
from their appellate jurisdiction. They hear appeals from
subordinate courts and tribunals within their territorial
limits.
 Decisions made by High Courts in these matters can be
further appealed to the Supreme Court.
3. Writ Jurisdiction:
 High Courts have the authority to issue writs, including
habeas corpus, mandamus, certiorari, prohibition, and quo
warranto, for the enforcement of fundamental rights.
 Writ jurisdiction allows citizens to directly approach the High
Court to seek remedies for violations of their constitutional
rights.
4. Civil and Criminal Cases:
 High Courts have jurisdiction over a wide array of civil and
criminal matters, including family disputes, property cases,
and criminal appeals.
5. Administrative and Supervisory Jurisdiction:
 High Courts exercise administrative and supervisory
jurisdiction over the lower judiciary within their territorial
limits. They can issue orders and directions to ensure the
effective functioning of subordinate courts.
6. Advisory Jurisdiction:
  Like the Supreme Court, High Courts also possess advisory
jurisdiction. The Governor of a state can seek their opinion
on matters of law or fact.
In summary, the jurisdiction of High Courts is extensive and
multifaceted, reflecting their central role in the Indian legal system.
Their authority encompasses not only the resolution of legal disputes
but also the protection of constitutional rights and the supervision of
the administration of justice at the state level.

Writs in the Indian Legal System: A Tool for Safeguarding Fundamental

Rights
Writs are extraordinary legal remedies that enable the judiciary to
provide immediate relief for violations of fundamental rights. These
writs, derived from the English legal system, serve as a powerful means
to protect citizens' liberties and ensure that justice is swift and effective.
In the Indian legal context, five types of writs are recognized under
Article 32 and Article 226 of the Constitution, each serving a distinct
purpose.
1. Habeas Corpus:
 Meaning: "To have the body."
 Purpose: This writ safeguards an individual's right to
personal liberty by protecting against illegal detention or
imprisonment.
 Use: If a person is unlawfully detained, the court issues a
writ of habeas corpus, commanding the detaining authority
to produce the detainee before the court.
2. Mandamus:
  Meaning: "We command."
 Purpose: This writ is issued to compel public authorities or
lower courts to perform their duties.
 Use: If a public official or authority is not fulfilling its legal
obligations, the court issues a writ of mandamus, directing
them to act in accordance with the law.
3. Certiorari:
 Meaning: "To be certified" or "To be informed."
 Purpose: This writ is used to quash the orders or decisions of
inferior courts, tribunals, or quasi-judicial bodies if they are
found to be ultra vires (beyond their legal authority).
 Use: If a lower court or tribunal exceeds its jurisdiction or
acts in violation of the principles of natural justice, the court
issues a writ of certiorari to set aside the decision.
4. Prohibition:
 Meaning: "To forbid."
 Purpose: This writ is issued to prevent lower courts or
tribunals from exceeding their jurisdiction or acting contrary
to the rules of natural justice.
 Use: If a lower court is about to proceed beyond its legal
authority, the court issues a writ of prohibition, directing it
to stop the proceedings.
5. Quo Warranto:
 Meaning: "By what authority."
  Purpose: This writ is used to inquire into the legality of a
person holding a public office and to ensure that they have
the legal authority to do so.
 Use: If there is doubt regarding the eligibility of an individual
holding a public office, the court issues a writ of quo
warranto, questioning their authority.
Applicability and Significance:
 Writs can be filed by any person whose fundamental rights are
violated, not just the person directly affected.
 The Supreme Court has the power to issue writs under Article 32,
and High Courts can issue them under Article 226.
 Writs are instrumental in upholding the rule of law, protecting
individual liberties, and ensuring the accountability of public
authorities.
Limitations and Exceptions:
 Writ jurisdiction is not unlimited, and there are certain situations
where it may not be applicable, such as in purely contractual
matters or private disputes.
 The Constitution also imposes limitations on the issuance of writs
against the President and Governors for the exercise of their
powers.
In conclusion, writs serve as a potent legal instrument in the hands of
the judiciary to safeguard fundamental rights, ensure the proper
functioning of government authorities, and uphold the principles of
justice. Their use represents a crucial aspect of the constitutional
framework, reinforcing the commitment to the protection of individual
liberties in the Indian legal system.