Following India’s independence in 1947, the Constitution of India was adopted on 26th January 1950. The Supreme Court of India was established shortly thereafter, with its inaugural session held on 28th January 1950. Articles 124 to 147 in Part V of the Constitution deal with the organization, independence, jurisdiction, powers, and procedures of the Supreme Court. The Court possesses the power of judicial review, enabling it to invalidate legislative and executive actions that violate constitutional provisions or fundamental rights.
| GS Paper | General Studies II |
| Topics for UPSC Prelims | The Supreme Court, Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), Chief Justice of India (CJI), Right To Privacy As A Fundamental Right, Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, Fundamental Rights, National Judicial Data Grid, The National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) Act, e-Courts Integrated Mission Mode Project. |
| Topics for UPSC Mains | Significance of Judiciary in Upholding Fundamental Rights and Democratic Values. |
Origin of the Article
This editorial is based on “The top court as custodian of liberties” which was published in The Hindu on 13/08/2024. The article discusses the Supreme Court of India’s role in upholding civil liberties through its recent decisions.
Relevancy for UPSC Students
Understanding the Supreme Court’s decisions and its role in protecting civil liberties is crucial for UPSC students. It aligns with the General Studies Paper 2 syllabus, covering topics like Fundamental Rights, Judicial Review, and the Separation of Powers. This knowledge aids in comprehending the Indian judiciary’s impact on democracy and individual freedoms, which is essential for both Prelims and Mains examinations.
Why in News
The Supreme Court’s recent decision to grant bail in the Delhi excise policy case is a significant development for UPSC aspirants due to its emphasis on the fundamental right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution. This ruling critiques delays in the criminal justice system and the misuse of stringent laws, echoing past UPSC questions on judicial independence, civil liberties, and the judiciary’s role in upholding fundamental rights. Understanding this case helps aspirants grasp the dynamic interplay between legal principles and constitutional mandates, crucial for both GS Paper 2 and the essay paper.
Supreme Court of India
The Supreme Court of India, was established on January 28, 1950, shortly after the adoption of the Constitution on January 26, 1950. Thereby, plays a pivotal role in the Indian judicial system. It serves as the apex court, ensuring the rule of law and the upholding of constitutional values.
Historical Context: After India gained independence in 1947, the Supreme Court was formed as the highest judicial authority. Thus, ensuring justice and interpreting the Constitution. It held its inaugural session on January 28, 1950, marking a significant step in India’s judicial history.
Constitutional Provisions: Articles 124 to 147 under Part V (The Union) and Chapter 6 (The Union Judiciary) of the Indian Constitution outline the structure, powers, and functioning of the Supreme Court. These provisions establish the Court’s authority and independence.
Jurisdiction: The Supreme Court’s jurisdiction encompasses original, appellate, and advisory capacities. Its rulings are binding on all courts in India, reinforcing its role as the ultimate arbiter of law.
Judicial Review: The Supreme Court has the power of judicial review, enabling it to invalidate legislative and executive actions that violate constitutional provisions or fundamental rights. This ensures a balance of power between the Union and the States and protects civil liberties.
Provisions Making the Supreme Court the Guardian of Civil Liberties
The Supreme Court of India is empowered by various constitutional and legal provisions to protect civil liberties, ensuring justice and safeguarding fundamental rights.
Constitutional Provisions:
- Article 13: This article renders any law that contradicts fundamental rights void, allowing the Supreme Court to strike down unconstitutional laws.
- Article 32: It grants individuals the right to approach the Supreme Court directly to enforce fundamental rights, making it a key protector of civil liberties.
- Article 136: This provision allows the Supreme Court to grant special leave to appeal against decisions of lower courts involving significant legal issues.
- Article 142: It empowers the Supreme Court to pass orders necessary for complete justice, safeguarding civil liberties and fundamental rights.
Other Tools:
- Writs: The Supreme Court can issue writs like Habeas Corpus, Mandamus, Prohibition, Certiorari, and Quo Warranto to enforce fundamental rights.
- PIL: Public Interest Litigations enable the Court to address broader social concerns and ensure justice.
- Judicial Review: This allows the Court to assess the constitutionality of laws and government actions, ensuring they comply with the Constitution.
Various Doctrines:
- Basic Structure Doctrine: Ensures that amendments do not alter the Constitution’s fundamental features, preserving democracy and the rule of law.
- Doctrine of Severability: Allows unconstitutional parts of laws to be invalidated without affecting the entire legislation.
- Doctrine of Eclipse: Suspends laws infringing on fundamental rights until they are aligned with the Constitution.
- Doctrine of Substantive Due Process: Protects individual freedoms by ensuring laws are just, fair, and reasonable.
- Doctrine of Colorable Legislation: Prevents the government from enacting laws indirectly that it cannot pass directly.
Instances Where the Supreme Court has Acted as the Guardian of Civil Liberties
The Supreme Court of India has a rich history of landmark judgments that have safeguarded civil liberties and upheld constitutional values.
- Delhi Excise Policy Case (2024): The Court reaffirmed the right to a speedy trial under Article 21, emphasizing that prolonged incarceration without trial violates civil liberties, particularly under stringent laws like the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).
- Navtej Singh Johar vs. Union of India (2018): The Court decriminalized consensual homosexual acts by striking down Section 377 of the IPC, affirming LGBTQ+ rights and individual dignity.
- Justice K.S. Puttaswamy vs. Union of India (2017): Recognized the right to privacy as a fundamental right, emphasizing its importance for individual dignity and protection against arbitrary state actions.
- Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015): The Court struck down Section 66A of the IT Act, protecting freedom of speech online and reinforcing Article 19(1)(a).
- Lalita Kumari vs. Government of Uttar Pradesh (2014): Ruled that police must register an FIR for cognizable offenses, ensuring prompt action and protection of civil liberties.
- Gaurav Jain vs. Union of India (1997): Addressed the rights of women and children in prostitution, emphasizing dignity and protection from socio-economic hardships.
- Maneka Gandhi vs. Union of India (1978): Expanded Article 21 to include the right to live with dignity, ensuring fair and reasonable laws.
- Kesavananda Bharati vs. State of Kerala (1973): Established the Basic Structure Doctrine, preserving the Constitution’s fundamental features.
- A.K. Gopalan vs. the State of Madras (1950): Tackled preventive detention laws, setting the stage for later rulings that better aligned with fundamental rights.
- Romesh Thappar v. State of Madras (1950): Reinforced freedom of the press under Article 19(1)(a), limiting arbitrary government bans.
Challenges Associated with Functioning of Supreme Court
The Supreme Court of India faces several significant challenges that impact its functioning and effectiveness in upholding justice.
- Implementation of Judgments: The execution of Supreme Court judgments is often slow and inconsistent, diminishing their impact and frustrating litigants. A lack of doctrinal consistency across benches further adds to confusion and unpredictability.
- Case Delays and Pendency: The Supreme Court struggles with an enormous backlog of cases, leading to significant delays. This undermines public confidence and adversely affects litigants’ lives.
- Master of The Roster Issue: The CJI’s exclusive power to form benches and allocate cases has been criticized for potentially leading to selective and biased assignments, undermining judicial fairness.
- Judicial Overreach and Activism: The Court has been accused of encroaching upon legislative and executive domains. Thus, disrupts the balance of power, and risking accusations of judicial authoritarianism.
- Appointments and Transparency Issues: The judicial appointment process lacks transparency and clear standards, eroding trust in the collegium system.
- Independence of Judiciary: Despite constitutional safeguards, the judiciary faces challenges like procedural delays and corruption, threatening its independence.
The Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct
The Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct outline ethical standards for judges, ensuring the integrity and fairness of the judiciary.
Core Values:
- Independence: Judges must make decisions free from external pressures, based solely on the law.
- Impartiality: Judges must be unbiased and fair, treating all parties equally.
- Integrity: Judges must act honestly and ethically, maintaining high standards of truthfulness.
- Propriety: Judges should conduct themselves with dignity, both inside and outside the courtroom.
- Equality: Judges must ensure non-discriminatory and fair administration of justice.
- Competence and Diligence: Judges must possess legal expertise and handle cases thoroughly and timely.
These values guide judges in maintaining ethical behavior and upholding the judiciary’s integrity.
Way Forward
Addressing the challenges and enhancing the Supreme Court’s functioning requires actionable steps and reforms.
- Strengthening Implementation Frameworks: Develop clear guidelines and monitoring mechanisms to ensure prompt and effective implementation of Supreme Court judgments.
- Reducing Case Backlog: Increase resources, such as more judges and technology-driven solutions like e-filing and case management, to expedite case processing.
- Ensuring Doctrinal Consistency: Foster uniform application of legal principles through cross-bench dialogue and comprehensive guidelines.
- Addressing Judicial Overreach: Reinforce the separation of powers by clarifying judicial intervention boundaries and promoting judicial restraint.
- Improving Appointments and Transparency: Reform the collegium system to enhance transparency and accountability in judicial appointments.
| UPSC Civil Services Examination, Previous Year Questions (PYQs) Mains Q. Discuss the significance of the Supreme Court’s ruling on the right to a speedy trial under Article 21 in the context of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) and its implications for civil liberties. (GS Paper II, 2022) Q. Resorting to ordinances has always raised concerns about violating the spirit of the separation of powers doctrine. Analyze whether the Supreme Court’s decisions on the issue have further facilitated resorting to this power. Should the power to promulgate ordinances be repealed? (GS Paper II, 2015) |
