(..19..)

JUDICIARY UNDER THE CONSTITUTION.

1. UNION JUDICIARY (I.E., SUPREME COURT) (ART. 124- 147).

QUESTION BANK.

1. 1. Discuss the provisions relating to qualification, appointment of the judges of the Supreme Court and different kinds of jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of India.

Q.2.    How is independence of judiciary secured under the Indian Constitution?.

Q.3.    Discuss the powers of the Supreme Court to declare validity of law? State whether the Supreme Court can review its own decisions?

Q.4.    Discuss the different kinds of Jurisdiction exercised by the Supreme Court.

Q.5. Explain the writ jurisdiction of the Supreme Court and that of High Court?

Q.6. Discuss fully the scope of Judicial Review under the Constitution.

SHORT NOTES.

1. Judicial Review.
2. Advisory Jurisdiction of Supreme Court.
3. Writ of Habeas Corpus.
4. Writ of Mandamus.
5. Judicial activism.  
6. Judicial Independence.

SYNOPSIS

1. INTRODUCTION.
2. COMPOSITION OF COURT [Art. 124 (1)].
3. a) Appointment of Judges [Art. 124 (2)].
4. b) Qualification [Art. 124 (3)].
5. c) Term of Office [Art. 124 (2)].
6. d) Ad-hoc Judges (Art. 127).

III.         JURISDICTION OF THE SUPREME COURT.

1. Original Jurisdiction-
2. a) Enforcement of fundamental rights (Art. 32).
3. b) Centre-State disputes (Art. 131).
4. Appellate Jurisdiction (Art. 132 to 136).
5. i) Appeal in constitutional matters (Art. 132).
6. ii) Appeal in Civil matters (Art. 133).

iii)      Appeal in Criminal matters (Art. 134).

1. Appeal by special leave.
2. Advisory jurisdiction (Art. 143).

NOTE.

1. INDEPENDENCE OF JUDICIARY.
2. a) Appointment of Judges.
3. b)
4. c)
5. d) No discussion in the House.
6. e) Separation of Judiciary from the executive.
7. f) Contempt of Court.

2 .WRIT JURISDICTION OF THE SUPREME COURT AND HIGH COURT

1. a) Habeas Corpus.

Meaning-

Who may apply-?

Procedure –

b).      Mandamus-

c).      Prohibition.

Distinction between ‘writ of prohibition’ and ‘writ of certiorari’-

d).      Certiorari.

i).       Jurisdiction.

1. ii) To correct error apparent on face of record-

iii)      Violation of nature justice.

1. Quo Warranto.

Distinction between writ jurisdictions under Art. 32 (Supreme Court) and 226 (High Court).

3.       JUDICIAL REVIEW.

I.        INTRODUCTION:-

                    India has a unified[1] judicial system, with the Supreme Court at the apex and the High Court below it. Thus, the Supreme Court enjoys the topmost position in the country’s judicial hierarchy. The Supreme Court is the interpreter and guardian of the Constitution. It is the ultimate Court of appeal in all civil and criminal matters and the final interpreter of the law of the land, the Court of record. Thus, it helps maintain uniformity of law throughout the country. The Supreme Court sits in Delhi.

II.      COMPOSITION OF THE SUPREME COURT[2] (Art. 124 (1)):-

                    The Supreme Court consists of a Chief Justice[3] and other judges, as the Parliament may prescribe from time to time. Presently, it consists of Chief Justice and 33[4] other Judges.

a)       Appointment of Judges[5] (Art. 124 (2)):-

                     The President appoints the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court after consulting with such other Judges of the Supreme Court and the High Courts as he deems necessary for the purpose. However, when appointing other judges, the president should always consult with the chief justice of India.

b)       Qualification (Art. 124 (3)):-

                    A person to be appointed as the Judge of the Supreme Court should possess the following qualifications-

1. He should be a citizen of India.
2. He has been the Judge of a High Court for at least five years or

• He has been for at least ten years an advocate of a High Court, and

1. He is, in the opinion of the President, a distinguished jurist[6].

c)       Term of Office (Art. 124 (2)):-

                    Judge of the Supreme Court holds office till he attains the age of 65 years. The Judge may resign from office by writing to the President. The Judge may be removed from his office by order of the President only on the grounds of proven misbehaviour or incapacity (Art. 124 (4) and (5)). The order of the President can only be passed after it has been addressed to both Houses of Parliament in the same session[7]. The address should be supported by a majority of the total membership of that House and also by a majority of not less than two-thirds of the members of that House present and voting (Art. 124, (4)). The procedure of presenting an address for investigation and proof of misbehavior[8] or incapacity[9] of a Judge will be determined by the Parliament by passing a law (Art. 124 (5)). This provision of the Constitution has ensured the security of the tenure of the Supreme Court Judge.

In K. Veeraswami v. Union of India[10].

Facts—Mr. Veeraswami was the Chief Justice of the Madras High Court in 1969. In 1976, the C.B.I. registered a crime against him, charging him with collecting wealth disproportionate to his known income sources and thus committing an offence under the Prevention of Corruption Act. The Appellant filed a petition in the High Court to quash the F.I.R. filed by the C.B.I., which was dismissed.

Supreme Court– held that a Supreme Court and High Court Judge could be prosecuted and convicted for criminal misconduct[11].

d)       Ad-hoc Judges[12] (Art. 127):-

                    Suppose at any time there is no quorum of the judges available in the Court to hold or continue any session of the Supreme Court. In that case, the Chief Justice of India may, with the previous consent of the President and after the consultation with the Chief Justice of the High Court concerned, request a Judge of the High Court to act as ad-hoc Judge in the Supreme Court for such period as may be necessary. Ad-hoc Judges should be qualified to be appointed as judges of the Supreme Court (Art. 127).

III.     JURISDICTION OF THE SUPREME COURT[13]:-

                    The jurisdiction of the Supreme Court is explained under the following heads.

1.       Original Jurisdiction[14]:-

The original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court may be explained as follows.

a)       Enforcement of fundamental rights[15] (Art. 32):-

                    The Supreme Court has been constituted as the guardian[16] of fundamental rights. Art. 32 empowered the Court to issue writs to enforce fundamental rights. These writs are writs of habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition[17], etc. (These writs are discussed in detail at the end of this topic).

b)       Centre-State disputes[18] (Art. 131):-

          The Supreme Court has original jurisdiction in any dispute-

1. i) Between the Government of India (i.e., Central Government) and one or more states.
2. ii) Between the Government of India and any States on one side and one or more States on the other.

iii) Between two or more States.

2.       Appellate Jurisdiction[19] (Art. 132 to 136):-

          The appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court can be divided into four main categories. Viz,

i)        Appeal in constitutional matters[20] (Art. 132):-

          An appeal to the Supreme Court is available from any judgment, decree, or final order of a High Court if it involves a substantial question of law regarding the interpretation of the Constitution.

ii)       Appeal in Civil matters[21] (Art. 133):-

          An appeal lies to the Supreme Court from any judgment, decree, or final order in a civil proceeding of a High Court only if the High Court certifies (under Art. 134-A) that-

1. a) The case involves a substantial question of law of general importance, and
2. b) In the opinion of the High Court, the said question needs to be decided by the Supreme Court.

iii)      Appeal in Criminal matters[22] (Art. 134):-

          An appeal lies to the Supreme Court from any judgment, final order, or sentence in a criminal proceeding of a High Court in the following two ways-

1. Without a certificate from the High Court.

            Appeal to the Supreme Court lies from the judgment of a High Court without a certificate of it if-

1. The High Court, on appeal, has reversed an order of acquittal of an accused person and sentenced him to death.
2. The High Court has withdrawn any case for trial before itself from any court subordinate to its authority. It has, in such a trial, convicted the accused person and sentenced him to death.
3. b) A certificate from the High Court, i.e., if the High Court certifies that the case is fit for appeal to the Supreme Court.

iv.      Appeal by special leave[23]:-

                    Under Art. 136, the Supreme Court is authorised to grant in its discretion special leave to appeal from any judgment, decree, determination, sentence, or order passed by any court or tribunal in the territory of India (except the tribunal constituted under the Armed Forces Act).

                    This Article vests very wide powers in the Supreme Court. Under this Article, a number of appeals are preferred before the Supreme Court.

3.       Advisory jurisdiction[24] (Art. 143):-

                    If at any time it appears to the President that-

1. a) A question of law or fact has arisen or is likely to arise and
2. b) The question is of such a nature and such public importance that it is expedient to obtain an opinion of the Supreme Court upon it; the President may refer the question for the advisory opinion of the Supreme Court, and the Court may, after such hearing as it thinks fit, report (or may not report) to the President its opinion thereon.

                    However, if the President refers to the Supreme Court any matter regarding the pre-constitution treaty, agreement, covenant, etc., the Court shall be bound to give its opinion thereon. The President must decide what question should be referred to the Court. The opinion is not binding on the President.

In Ismail Faruqui v. India[25] (Babri Masjid Demolition Case)

Facts– The Supreme Court’s opinion on the question of whether a Ram temple originally existed at the site where the Babri Masjid subsequently stood.

The Supreme Court held that this question is useless, opposed to secularism, and favourable to one religious community and, therefore, does not require answering.

 

NOTE.

1.       INDEPENDENCE OF JUDICIARY[26]:-

The Constitution makes various provisions to ensure the independence of the judiciary from the rest of the two organs. Viz.

a)       Appointment of Judges:-

  The President appoints the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, with the consultation of such numbers of judges as the Supreme Court and the High Courts, as he deems necessary for the purpose. However, when appointing other judges, the President should always consult the Chief Justice of India (Art.124 (2)). The President’s power under this Article is formal because the President acts according to the advice of the Council of Ministers and the Prime Minister as its head. Constitutional framers[27] wanted to keep the judiciary independent from the interference of the Executive (i.e., the Prime Minister and the Council of Ministers); hence, they laid conditions on the President to consult with other Judges. However, on April 25, 1973, the Government suddenly broke this 22-year-old practice. Mr. A.N. Ray was appointed Chief Justice of India, superseding three senior colleagues, i.e., Justice Shelat, Hegde, and Grover. Eight hours after the swearing-in ceremony of Mr. A.N. Ray as the Chief Justice of India, the three Judges resigned from the Supreme Court. The action of the Government raised great controversy[28]. The Supreme Court Bar Association condemned[29] the action of the Government in superseding the three eminent Judges of the Supreme Court. According to the resolution, the Government’s action was a blatant and outrageous attempt to undermine the independence and impartiality of the judiciary and lower the prestige and dignity of the Supreme Court. The Government, however, justified its action on the following grounds:

Firstly, according to Art. 124 of the Constitution, the President has absolute discretion to appoint anyone he finds suitable for the post of Chief Justice of India.

Secondly, it was argued that the Government followed the Law Commission’s recommendations in appointing the Chief Justice and superseding the three senior judges.

                    In 1977, when the Janata Party formed the Government, defeating the Congress Party in general elections, it reviewed the old policy of seniority, stating that it was non-controversial[30].

In S. P. Gupta v. Union of India[31], popularly known as the ‘Judge’s transfer Case,’ the Supreme Court unanimously agreed with the meaning of the term ‘consultation’ as explained by the majority in Sankalchand Sheth’s Case. The meaning given in that case was that the ultimate power to appoint judges is vested in the Executive (i.e., the President).

But in a landmark judgment in S. C. Advocate-on-Record Association v. Union of India[32]The Supreme Court overruled its earlier judgment in S. P. Gupta’s case and held that the Chief Justice of India should be consulted regarding the appointment of Judges of the Supreme Court and the High Courts.

b)       Jurisdiction:-

                    The Constitution conferred wide powers on the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, whereby the Parliament can extend the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court but cannot curtail it.

c)       Salary:-

                    The judges’ salaries are paid out of the consolidated fund and cannot be reduced except in a grave financial emergency.

d)       No discussion in the House[33]:-

                    No discussion shall take place in Parliament with respect to the conduct of the Judge of the Supreme Court or a High Court in the discharge of his duties (Art. 121 and 211). However, the impeachment proceeding can be moved in Parliament against any judge of the Supreme Court or a High Court.

e)       Separation of Judiciary from executive[34]:-

                    Art. 50 directs the State to take steps to separate the judiciary from executives. It emphasises[35] the need to secure the judiciary from interference by the executives.

f)        Contempt of Court[36]:-

                    The Supreme Court and High Courts are empowered to punish those who are guilty of contempt of Court (Art. 129 and 215).

                    ***

2.       WRITE JURISDICTION OF THE SUPREME COURT AND HIGH COURT[37]:-

                    Art. 32 and 226 confer writ jurisdiction on the Supreme Court and High Court, respectively. ‘Writ’ is an instrument or an order of the Court that directs an individual or an administrative authority to do some act or abstain from doing something. The court can issue the following types of writs. Viz,

a)       Habeas Corpus[38]:-

Meaning– The Latin phrase ‘Habeas Corpus’ means ‘have the body’ or ‘bring the body’. By this writ, the court directs the person or authority who has detained another person to bring the prisoner’s body before the Court so that the Court may decide the validity, jurisdiction or justification for such detention[39]. The object of this writ is to release a person from illegal detention and not to punish the detaining authority. However, in appropriate cases, the court may award monetary compensation to someone detained illegally[40].

Who may apply[41]?

                    A person illegally detained may apply for a writ of habeas corpus. But if the prisoner himself cannot make such an application, it can be made by any other person with interest in the prisoner, e.g., his wife, father, brother, friend, etc. Even in many cases, a letter sent to the Court[42] by the prisoner or news in the newspaper is treated as a writ of Habeas Corpus (Public Interest Litigation).

Bhavasagar vs. Stats of A.P10.

Facts—Bhavasagar was a merchant. Police arrested him on 26-9-1992. His friends filed a Habeas Corpus Writ before the High Court; the state filed a false application that they had not arrested him. The High Court appointed a Commissioner, who reported with evidence to the High Court that the Police illegally arrested Bhavasagar.

Held—The High Court ordered Bhavasagar’s release from police custody and the state government’s payment of Rs. 20,000/—as compensation for his illegal arrest.

Procedure[43]:-

b) Mandamus[44]:-

Meaning, nature, and scope:-

                    ‘Mandamus’ means a command. It is an order issued by a court to a public authority asking it to perform a public duty imposed upon it by the Constitution or any other law.

                    Mandamus can be granted only when-

1. a) A legal duty is imposed on the authority in question, and
2. b) The petitioner has the legal right to compel the performance of that duty from such public authority.

Who may apply-?

          A person whose right has been infringed may apply for a writ of mandamus. Thus, in the case of an incorporated company, the company itself should file the petition.

Against whom mandamus would lie[45]:-

          Writ of mandamus is available against Parliament and legislatures, courts and tribunals, the Government and its officers, local authorities like Municipalities, Panchayats, State-owned corporations, Universities, and other Educational Institutions, against Election Authorities, and other authorities falling under the definition of ‘State’ under Art. 12 of the Constitution.

In G.S.F. Corporation v. Lotus Hotels (P) Ltd[46].

Facts- The Corporation agreed with Lotus Hotel Group to finance the hotel’s construction. However, the Corporation did not release funds.

Held– The Gujarat High Court issued a mandamus writ against the Corporation to release the agreed-upon funds.

c)       Prohibition[47]:-

Meaning, nature, and scope:-

                    The writ of Prohibition can be issued by the Superior Court (i.e., Supreme Court or High Court) to the inferior Court or tribunal or authority forbidding it from continuing with a proceeding or suit on the ground that the proceeding or case is without or in excess of jurisdiction. This writ is based on the principle ‘Prevention is better than cure’.

Who may apply-?

                    Where the defect of jurisdiction is apparent on the face of proceedings, an application for prohibition can be brought by the aggrieved party and a stranger.

Against whom it lies:-

                    Since a writ of prohibition is a judicial writ[48], it may be issued against Courts, Tribunals, and other quasi-judicial authorities[49] such as tax Authorities, customs authorities, settlement officers, etc.

The distinction between ‘writ of prohibition’ and ‘writ of certiorari’:-

                    Both are judicial writs issued by the Superior Court (i.e., Supreme Court or High Courts) against (inferior) Courts and Tribunals. But they differ in the point of time of issuance of it.

                    The writ of Certiorari is issued to quash the decision already given. In contrast, the writ of Prohibition is issued to prevent the lower Court’s exercise of the wrong jurisdiction in the proceeding before it.

d)       Certiorari[50]:-

Meaning– ‘Certiorari’ means ‘to certify’. Certiorari in England requires that a superior court (for instance, the King’s Court) certify to the King that a lower court or tribunal has acted properly in a particular case. The King’s Court would call for the record of a subordinate court connected with the proceeding of the case, and if it is found that the lower Court’s order, decision, or determination was palpably wrong, the Court will quash it.

          The writ of Certiorari in India is issued either to quashed a decision of the lower Court or tribunal or to remove a case from an inferior tribunal to be tried by a higher Court (i.e., by the Supreme Court or High Court). However, in India, the writ of Certiorari is mostly issued to quash the decisions of the inferior Courts or tribunals on the ground of using an excess of jurisdiction.

Grounds of issue:-

                    A writ of Certiorari may be issued on the following grounds-

i).       Without Jurisdiction[51]:-

          When an inferior court or tribunal acts without jurisdiction vested in it by the law, fails to exercise jurisdiction vested in it, or abuses the jurisdiction, a writ of Certiorari may be issued against it.

In R. V. Minister of Transport[52].

Facts—The Minister was not empowered to revoke a license, but he passed an order revocating it.

Held– The order was quashed because it was without jurisdiction and, therefore, ultra vires.

1. ii) To correct errors apparent on the face of the record[53]:-

                    If an error of law is apparent on the face of the record, the decision of the inferior Court or tribunal may be quashed by the writ of Certiorari.

iii)      Violation of natural justice[54]:-

                    A writ of Certiorari is issued by a subordinate Court or tribunal in violation of the principles of natural justice.

Who may apply-?

                    Generally, the person whose right has been affected may apply for a writ of Certiorari. However, if the question affects the public at large, any person may apply.

e)       Quo Warranto[55]:-

          Meaning– ‘Quo Warranto’ means ‘what is your authority’, or ‘show your authority’. It is issued against an occupier or usurper of an independent substantive public office of permanent character to show by what authority he holds the same. If he is found to be holding such public office without authority, the writ of Quo Warranto ousts him from his office. However, the writ also protects the holder of a public office from being deprived of that office illegally.

In K. B. Raju v. A. P[56].

Held– The Andra Pradesh High Court quashed the appointment of the Government Pleader on the ground that the rule for the said appointment was not complied with.

Who may apply?

                    Any private person may apply for a writ of Quo Warranto challenging the legality and validity of an appointment to a public office even though he is not personally aggrieved or interested in the matter.

The distinction between writ jurisdictions under Art. 32 (Supreme Court) and under Art. 226[57] (High Court).-

                    The Supreme Court, under Art. 32, and a High Court, under Art. 226, can issue directions, orders, or writs. However, there are some differences between these two.

1. The right is guaranteed under Art. 32 can be exercised to enforce fundamental rights only by the Supreme Court, whereas the right under Art. 226, can be exercised for enforcement of –
2. a) the fundamental rights, as well as,
3. b) for any other purpose (i.e., to enforce any other legal right) by the High Court. Thus, with this respect, the power of the High Court on the subject matter is wider than the power conferred by Art. 32 on the Supreme Court.
4. The jurisdiction of the Supreme Court under Art. 32 is India-wide, whereas the jurisdiction of the High Court under Art. 226, is restricted to the territory of that State where the High Court is situated. It is also subject to the Supreme Court’s jurisdiction.
5. Art. 32 is itself a fundamental right. On the other hand, Art. 226 is not a fundamental right. Therefore, the issue of the writ may be refused.
6. Remedy provided in Art. 226 is discretionary, and the High Court always has the discretion to refuse to grant any writ if it is satisfied that the aggrieved party can have adequate or suitable relief elsewhere. Accordingly, this remedy cannot be claimed as a right.

However, the remedy under Art. 32 is itself a fundamental right; hence, it does not depend upon the discretion of the Court but can be claimed as a right.

3.       JUDICIAL REVIEW[58]:-

A) Judicial review of its own Judgments:-

               Art. 137 empowers the Supreme Court to review its judgment. This power of the Supreme Court is subject to any law passed by the Parliament. The Supreme Court can exercise this power of review-

1. a) If it discovers any new important matter of evidence.
2. b) If it discovers any apparent mistake or error on the record’s face.
3. c) On any other sufficient and reasonable ground.

In R. D. Sugar v. Nagary[59]

Facts– Petitioner sought the review of an earlier judgment of the Supreme Court on the ground that certain observations in the judgment amounted to almost branding him as an uneducated criminal, that is, guilty of abetting, forgery, and perjury, which were unmatched and should, therefore, be canceled.

Supreme Court held- that a judgment of the final Court of the land is final. A review of such a judgment is an exceptional phenomenon, permitted only where a grave and glaring error or other well-established ground is made out.

B) To Examine the Legality of Law:-

            Review can be sought to examine the constitutionality of any central or State enactment or executive order. If they violate the Constitution. The need for such type of review is –

            Need – to protect fundamental rights.

                        -to uphold the supremacy of the Constitution.hhhhhhhhhgh\-

                         -to maintain federal equilibrium.

*****

[1] एकात्म

[2] न्यायालयाची रचना

[3] सरन्यायाधिष

[4] The Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Amendment Act, 2019 has increased number of Supreme Court judges from 30 to 33.

[5] न्यायाधिष नियुक्ती

[6]  प्रख्यात कायदेपंडीत

[7] एकाच अधिवेषनात

[8] गैरवर्तन

[9]अकार्यक्षमता

[10] (1919) 3SCC 655.

[11] Impeachment of Justice V. Ramaswami.

Facts– Impeachment proceeding was first time moved against Mr. Justice V. Ramaswami a sitting judge of the Supreme Court. Allegation against him was that, while being Chief Justice of Punjab and Harinaya High Court, he had purchased furniture, carpets and air-conditioners far in excess of the limits prescribed for Judges.  A motion sponsored by 108 MPs of the Ninth Lok-Sabha for his impeachment was admitted by the then Speaker, Mr. Rabi Ray, he constituted a three Judge Committee of the Supreme Court Judges to inquire into the allegations of “financial irregularities” against him under the Judges Inquiry Committee Act. The Ninth Lok-Sabha was dissolved when Mr. V. P. Singh Government fell due to withdrawal of the support by the BJP. When the Tenth Lok-Sabha was constituted after the Parliamentary elections, it took up for consideration of the impeachment motion. Justice Ramaswami filed a petition in Supreme Court requesting it to issue a direction that the impeachment motion was lapsed on the dissolution of the Ninth Lok-Sabha and the new Lok-Sabha cannot take it up for consideration.

 The Court Held that the motion admitted by the Speaker of previous Lok-Sabha for his impeachment had not lapsed on its dissolution and the three Judge Committee could probe into the matter under the Judges Inquiry Act. The committee appointed to inquire in matter had come to the conclusion that there was “willful and gross misuse of office, purposeful and persistent negligence in the discharge of his duties, intentional and habitual extravagance at the cost of the public exchequer and moral turpitude by using public funds for private purposes in diverse ways.”

The impeachment motion was, however, defeated in the Lok-Sabha as it failed to get the support of the two-thirds majority of the members present and voting. The Congress party abstained from voting. The result was that there was 176 votes in favour of’ the impeachment but none against.

[12] तदर्थ न्यायाधिष

[13] सर्वोच्च न्यायालयाचे अधिकार क्षेत्र

[14] प्राथमिक अधिकार क्षेत्र

[15] मुलभूत अधिकारांची अंमलबजावणी

[16] रक्षणकर्ता

[17] बंदीप्रत्यक्षीकरण, परमादेष, प्रतिबंधात्मक

[18] केंद्र-राज्य सरकार तंटे सोडविणे

[19] अपिल अधिकार क्षेत्र

[20] अपिल अधिकार क्षेत्र

[21] घटनात्मक बाबीमध्ये अपील

[22] फौजदारी बाबीमध्ये अपिल प्राथमिक अधिकार क्षेत्र

[22] मुलभूत अधिकारांची अंमलबजावणी

[22] रक्षणकर्ता

[22] बंदीप्रत्यक्षीकरण, परमादेष, प्रतिबंधात्मक

[22] केंद्र-राज्य सरकार तंटे सोडविणे

[22]  अपिल अधिकार क्षेत्र

[23]  विषेश परवानगीने अपिल

[24]  सल्लाविशयक अधिकार क्षेत्र

[25] AIR 1992 SC 522.

[26] न्यायपालिकेचे स्वातत्र्य

[27] घटनाकार

[28] विवाद

[29] धिक्कार

[30] In Sankalachand Sheth’s Case (AIR 1977 SC 2328).

Supreme Court Held- that the word ‘consultation” meant full and effective consultation.

[31] AIR 1982 SC 149.

[32] (AIR 1993) 4 SCC 441.

[33] कायदेमंडळात चर्चा नाही

[34] कार्यकारीपासून न्यायपालिकेचे अलगीकरण

[35]  जोर देणे

[36]  न्यायालयाचा अवमान

[37]  लेखादेष अधिकारक्षेत्र

[38]  बंदीप्रत्यक्षीकरण/देहोपस्थिती / समोरील व्यकतीस हजर करणे

[39]  कैदयाला/आरोपीला न्यायालयासमोर उभे/हजर करण्यासाठी व त्याच्या अटकेची कारणे, कायदेषिरपणा व कार्यकक्षा तपासण्यासाठी अटक करणाÚया अधिकाÚयास काढलेली आज्ञा

[40] In Thameen Ansori’s Case (Reported in Indian Express, Dt 5^th May, 2003

1. 2) Facts- The Madras High Court has directed the State Government to pay a compensation of Rs. 1 lakh to Thameer Ansan for wrongfully detaining him for four months under the Goondas Act.

[41] कोण अर्ज करु शकतो

[42] In Bandhu Mukti Morcha v. Union of India, (AIR 1984 SC 803).

Facts-An organization dedicated to the cause of release of bonded labourers informed Supreme Court through a letter that they conducted a survey of the stone-quarries situated in Faridabad District of the State of Haryana and found that there were large number of labourers working in these stone-quarries under “inhuman and intolerable conditions” and many of them were bonded labourers. Petitioners prayed that a writ be issued for proper implementation of the various provisions of the Constitution and statutes with a view to ending the misery suffering and helplessness of these labourres, and release of bonded labourers. The Court treated letter as a writ-petition, and appointed Commission consisting of two advocates to visit these stone-quarries and make an inquiry and report to the Court about the existence of bonded labourers. Speaking for the majority Bhagwati. J. Held that ‘poor in India can seek enforcement of their fundamental rights from the Supreme Court by writing a letter to any judge. Also such a letter does not have to be accompanied by an affidavit. Such letter need not be addressed to any judge but to court

10 (1993)

Kanu Sanyal vs. District Magistrate, Darjeeling (MR 1974 SC 510)

Facts-   Kanu Sanyal was a top communist leader. He was arrested and detained by Visakhapatnam Police. A habeas corpus petition was filed praying for production of Kanu Sanyal before the Court. The Advocate representing the police argued that habeas corpus would be applicable where the person was detained illegally, and in the case of Kanu Sanyal it could not apply because he was legally detained.

Held- The Supreme Court did not accept the State’s argument. It ordered for the production of Kanu Sanyal.

[43] Procedure.

1. i) Every application for the writ of Habeas Corpus must be accompanied by an affidavit of the applicant and must state all the Facts and circumstances of an illegal arrest.
2. ii) If the court is satisfied that there is prima facie case for granting the prayer, it will issue a ‘rule nisi’ calling upon the detaining authority on a specified day to show cause as to why the rule nisi (interim order of release) should not be made absolute.

iii)          On the specified day, the court will consider the merits of the case and will pass an appropriate order-

1. a) If the court is satisfied, that the detention was not justified, it will issue the writ and direct the detaining authority to release the prisoner forthwith. Or,
2. b) On the other hand, if according to the court, the detention was justified, the rule nisi (interim order of release) will be discharged.

[44] सार्वजनिक किंवा तत्सम खात्यास कायदेषिर कर्तव्याचे योग्य ते पालन परमादेष करण्यासाठी काढलेला आदेष – परमादेश

[45] कोणाच्या विरुध्द परमादेश

[46] AIR 1983 SC 848.

[47] प्रतिबंध करणारा आदेष – वरील कोर्टाने खालील कोर्टास/अधिकाÚयास त्या समोरील कामकाज अथवा दावा चालू ठेवल्यास प्रतिबंध करणरा आदेष

[48] न्यायिक आदेष

[49] समन्यायिक अधिकारी

[50] उत्प्रेक्षण – वरील कोर्टात चालविण्यासाठीची आज्ञा जर खालील कोर्टाने त्यास अधिकार नसताना, नैसर्गिक न्यायाच्या तत्वांचे उल्लंधन करुन आज्ञा दिली असेल तर.

[51] अधिकार क्षेत्राचा अभाव

[52]  (1934) 1 K.B. 277.

[53] प्रथमदर्षनी होणारी चूक दुरुस्त करणे

[54] नैसर्गिक न्यायाच्या तत्वांचे उल्लंघन

[55] अधिकारपृच्छा – राजकीय अधिकाÚयास जर तो अयोग्य मार्गाने अधिकारी असल्यासचे निदर्षनास येत असल्यास तो काणेत्या अधिकारात अधिकारी आहे अथवा सार्वजनिक कामकाज चालवितो त्याची विचारणा करणे/ त्याच्या अधिकारांची विचारणा करणे.

[56] AIR 1981 A.P. 24.

[57] कलम 32 आणि कलम 226 मधील लेखादेषात फरक

[58] न्यायिक पुनर्विलोकन

[59] AIR 1976 SC 2183.