01 · Explore
Why Do We Need an Independent Judiciary?
In any society, disputes are inevitable. An independent judiciary ensures these are settled according to the 'rule of law', where every individual is equal before the law regardless of status.
The principal role of the judiciary is to protect the rule of law and ensure the supremacy of law. It safeguards individual rights, settles disputes in accordance with the law, and prevents democracy from turning into a dictatorship by any individual or group. To perform these roles effectively, the judiciary must be free from political pressures.
Independence of the judiciary means that the executive and legislature must not restrain its functioning or interfere with its decisions. It also means that judges must be able to perform their duties without fear or favour. However, independence does not mean a lack of accountability; the judiciary remains accountable to the Constitution and the people.
Pause & Try
Think it through first. Writing and checking your answer is free with an account.
Question
What does the 'rule of law' imply in the context of the judiciary?
Sign in to see the answer
Write your own answer and compare it with ours. It’s free.
Sign inNew here? Sign up freeNCERT reference: chapter PDF pages 2, 3.
02 · Explore
Provisions for Judicial Independence
The Indian Constitution includes several measures to protect the judiciary from interference by the other two organs of government.
The legislature is not involved in the appointment of judges to prevent party politics from influencing the process. To be appointed, a person must have significant legal experience. Once appointed, judges have a fixed tenure and security of office; they can only be removed through an extremely difficult procedure in Parliament.
Financial independence is also ensured. The salaries and allowances of judges are not subject to the approval of the legislature. Furthermore, the judiciary has the power to penalize for 'contempt of court', protecting judges from unfair personal criticism. Parliament cannot discuss the conduct of judges except during removal proceedings.
Pause & Try
Think it through first. Writing and checking your answer is free with an account.
Question
How does the Constitution ensure the financial independence of the judiciary?
Sign in to see the answer
Write your own answer and compare it with ours. It’s free.
Sign inNew here? Sign up freeNCERT reference: chapter PDF pages 3, 4.
03 · Explore
Appointment and Removal of Judges
The process of appointing and removing judges is designed to balance power and maintain the integrity of the courts.
While the President officially appoints judges, a 'collegium' system has evolved through Supreme Court rulings between 1982 and 1998. The Chief Justice of India (CJI) recommends names in consultation with the four senior-most judges of the Supreme Court. This principle of collegiality ensures that the judiciary has a significant say in its own appointments, though the Council of Ministers also plays an important role.
Removing a judge is intentionally difficult to prevent arbitrary dismissals. A judge can only be removed on grounds of 'proven misbehaviour' or 'incapacity'. This requires a motion approved by a special majority in both Houses of Parliament. In Indian history, while removal proceedings have been initiated (such as the 1991 case of Justice V. Ramaswami), no Supreme Court judge has been successfully removed to date because the motion failed to get the support of one-half of the total strength of the House.
| Process | Key Participants | Requirement |
|---|---|---|
| Appointment | President, CJI, Collegium | Consultation with 4 senior-most judges |
| Removal | Both Houses of Parliament | Special Majority (2/3rd present and voting + 50% total strength) |
Pause & Try
Think it through first. Writing and checking your answer is free with an account.
Question
On what grounds can a Supreme Court or High Court judge be removed?
Sign in to see the answer
Write your own answer and compare it with ours. It’s free.
Sign inNew here? Sign up freeNCERT reference: chapter PDF pages 4, 5, 6.
04 · Explore
The Integrated Judicial Structure
India has a single integrated judicial system, meaning higher courts supervise the lower courts in a unified hierarchy.
The structure is pyramidal. At the apex is the Supreme Court of India, whose decisions are binding on all other courts. Below it are the High Courts, which handle cases within a State's jurisdiction and hear appeals from lower courts.
At the base are the District Courts and Subordinate Courts. District Courts deal with cases arising in the district and decide serious criminal offences. Subordinate Courts consider civil and criminal cases of a more local nature. This integrated system allows the Supreme Court to transfer judges or move cases from any court to itself.
Hierarchy of the Indian Judicial System
- 1
Supreme Court
Top court; decisions binding on all; can transfer cases and judges.
- 2
High Courts
State-level; hears appeals from lower courts; issues writs for rights.
- 3
District Courts
District-level; deals with local cases and serious criminal offences.
- 4
Subordinate Courts
Lowest level; considers civil and criminal cases.
The pyramidal structure of the Indian Judiciary where higher courts exercise superintendence over lower courts.
Pause & Try
Think it through first. Writing and checking your answer is free with an account.
Question
What does a 'single integrated judicial system' mean?
Sign in to see the answer
Write your own answer and compare it with ours. It’s free.
Sign inNew here? Sign up freeNCERT reference: chapter PDF page 7.
05 · Explore
Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court
The Supreme Court of India has a wide range of powers defined by the Constitution, categorized into different types of jurisdiction.
Original Jurisdiction covers cases that go directly to the Supreme Court, primarily disputes between the Union and States or between different States. Writ Jurisdiction allows the court to issue orders like Habeas Corpus or Mandamus to protect Fundamental Rights. Any citizen can approach the Supreme Court directly if their rights are violated.
Appellate Jurisdiction makes the Supreme Court the highest court of appeal for civil, criminal, and constitutional cases from High Courts. Advisory Jurisdiction allows the President to seek the Court's opinion on matters of public importance, though the advice is not binding. Additionally, under Article 137, the Court has the power to review any judgment pronounced or order made by it.
Pause & Try
Think it through first. Writing and checking your answer is free with an account.
Question
What is the difference between Original and Appellate jurisdiction?
Sign in to see the answer
Write your own answer and compare it with ours. It’s free.
Sign inNew here? Sign up freeNCERT reference: chapter PDF pages 8, 9, 10.
06 · Explore
Judicial Activism and PIL
Since 1979, the judiciary has become more proactive through Public Interest Litigation (PIL), expanding access to justice.
Traditionally, only an aggrieved person could move the court. PIL changed this by allowing any public-spirited citizen or organization to file a case on behalf of those who cannot approach the court. A landmark early example was the Hussainara Khatoon vs. Bihar case (1979), where the court heard a petition regarding 'under trials' who had spent years in jail longer than their potential punishment.
Judicial activism has democratized the system and forced executive accountability. However, it has also led to the 'overburdening' of courts and blurred the line between the judiciary and the executive. Critics argue that the court sometimes involves itself in administrative matters, like pollution control or investigating corruption, which should be handled by the government.
Pause & Try
Think it through first. Writing and checking your answer is free with an account.
Question
How did PIL change the traditional requirement for filing a court case?
Sign in to see the answer
Write your own answer and compare it with ours. It’s free.
Sign inNew here? Sign up freeNCERT reference: chapter PDF pages 11, 12, 13, 14, 15.
07 · Explore
The Judiciary as Protector of Rights
The judiciary uses two main constitutional tools to protect individual liberties: Writ powers and Judicial Review.
Under Article 32, the Supreme Court can issue writs to restore fundamental rights. More significantly, the power of Judicial Review allows the Court to examine the constitutionality of any law. If a law is found to be inconsistent with the Constitution, the Court can declare it unconstitutional and non-operational.
This power extends to federal matters; if the Central government makes a law on a subject that belongs to the States, the Supreme Court can strike it down. While the term 'Judicial Review' is not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution, it is implied by the Court's role as the interpreter of the Constitution and protector of rights.
Pause & Try
Think it through first. Writing and checking your answer is free with an account.
Question
Is the term 'Judicial Review' mentioned in the Indian Constitution?
Sign in to see the answer
Write your own answer and compare it with ours. It’s free.
Sign inNew here? Sign up freeNCERT reference: chapter PDF pages 15, 16, 17.
08 · Explore
Judiciary and Parliament: A Delicate Balance
The relationship between the judiciary and the legislature has often been marked by conflict, particularly regarding the power to amend the Constitution.
A major historical conflict involved the 'Right to Property'. Parliament wanted to restrict this right for land reforms, but the Court initially blocked these moves. This led to a series of constitutional amendments and legal battles between 1967 and 1973.
The landmark Kesavananda Bharati case (1973) resolved much of this by establishing the 'Basic Structure' doctrine. The Court ruled that while Parliament can amend the Constitution, it cannot change its basic structure. The Court also reserved the right to decide what constitutes the 'basic structure'. This ensures that the essential features of the democracy remain protected from political whims.
Pause & Try
Think it through first. Writing and checking your answer is free with an account.
Question
What was the significance of the Kesavananda Bharati case?
Sign in to see the answer
Write your own answer and compare it with ours. It’s free.
Sign inNew here? Sign up freeNCERT reference: chapter PDF pages 18, 19, 20, 21.