Question: There are many provisions in the Constitution of India which secure the independence and impartiality of the Judiciary. Discuss those provisions and refer to important judgments of the Supreme Court. [UPJS 2016]   Find the answer to the mains question only on Legal Bites. [There are many provisions in the Constitution of India which secure the independence and… Read More »

Question: There are many provisions in the Constitution of India which secure the independence and impartiality of the Judiciary. Discuss those provisions and refer to important judgments of the Supreme Court. [UPJS 2016] Find the answer to the mains question only on Legal Bites. [There are many provisions in the Constitution of India which secure the independence and impartiality of the Judiciary. Discuss those provisions and refer to important judgments of the Supreme Court....

Question: There are many provisions in the Constitution of India which secure the independence and impartiality of the Judiciary. Discuss those provisions and refer to important judgments of the Supreme Court. [UPJS 2016]

Find the answer to the mains question only on Legal Bites. [There are many provisions in the Constitution of India which secure the independence and impartiality of the Judiciary. Discuss those provisions and refer to important judgments of the Supreme Court. [UPJS 2016]

Answer

Independence of the judiciary means a fair and neutral judicial system of a country, which can take its decision without any interference of the executive or legislative branch of government. Judicial Independence is guaranteed in the constitution and cemented

Read more at Legal Bites © Reserved: https://www.legalbites.in/provisions-which-ensure-the-independent-judiciary/

Case laws: The first case was of Marbury v. Madison, [(1803) 1 Cr 137.] which ruled that it is a duty of every judge in the United States to treat as void any enactment which violates the Constitution. The Court cannot properly decline to exercise this power. This has led to the establishment of the doctrine of judicial supremacy. Since then the supremacy and independence and impartiality of the Indian Courts have been dealt with by the judiciary through many cases.

The transfer of judges of the higher judiciary being one of the essentials which affect the independence and functioning of the judiciary was discussed in Union of India v. Sankalchand Himatlal Sheth AIR 1977 SC 2328. However, the Supreme Court ruled that the President had the power to transfer judges with neither their consent nor the ‘concurrence’ of the Chief Justice of India (CJI).

While interpreting the word “consultation,” the Supreme Court ruled that the term can never mean “concurrence”. Hence, the CJI’s opinion, the court ruled, was not binding on the executive. But nonetheless, the executive could depart from his opinion only in exceptional circumstances, and, in such cases, its decision could well be subject to the rigors of judicial review. This position was also reiterated in the First Judges Case (1981).

However, in the Second Judges Case (1993), the court overruled its earlier decisions, introduced the collegiums system, and held that “consultation” really meant “concurrence”, and that the CJI’s view enjoys primacy since he is “best equipped to know and assess the worth” of candidates. But, the CJI, in turn, was to formulate his opinion through a body of senior judges that the court described as the collegium.

In 1998, in the Third Judges Case, the court clarified its position further. The collegium, it said, will comprise, in the case of appointments of judges to the Supreme Court, the CJI and his four senior-most colleagues: and, in the case of appointments to the high courts, the CJI, and his two senior-most colleagues. Additionally, for appointments to the high courts, the collegium must consult such other senior judges serving in the Supreme Court who had previously served as judges of the high court concerned.

When through the 99th constitutional amendment, the collegium system was sought to be replaced by the National Judicial Appointments Commission, the Supreme Court swiftly struck it down in the Fourth Judges Case (2015) and ruled that the primacy of the collegium was a part of the Constitution’s basic structure, and this power could not, therefore, be removed even through a constitutional amendment.


Important Mains Questions Series for Judiciary, APO & University Exams

  1. Constitutional Law Mains Questions Series Part-I
  2. Constitutional Law Mains Questions Series Part-I
  3. Constitutional Law Mains Questions Series Part-II
  4. Constitutional Law Mains Questions Series Part-IV
  5. Constitutional Law Mains Questions Series Part-V
  6. Constitutional Law Mains Questions Series Part-VI
  7. Constitutional Law Mains Questions Series Part-VII
  8. Constitutional Law Mains Questions Series Part-VIII
  9. Constitutional Law Mains Questions Series Part-IX
  10. Constitutional Law Mains Questions Series Part-X
Updated On 2021-06-03T18:26:02+05:30
Admin LB

Admin LB

Next Story