Indian Judiciary Exercise Solutions | KalviGavani

• (a) Article 124 ✅
• (b) Article 214
• (c) Article 32
• (d) Article 226

• (a) Article 14 only
• (b) Articles 13, 32, and 226 ✅
• (c) Article 370
• (d) Article 356

• (a) 26
• (b) 31
• (c) 34 ✅
• (d) 28

• (a) Only the Supreme Court
• (b) Only the High Court
• (c) Both the Supreme Court and the High Court ✅
• (d) Only the District Court

• (a) Article 131
• (b) Article 132
• (c) Article 143 ✅
• (d) Article 136

• (a) Any court in India
• (b) The Supreme Court
• (c) Any court in the state where they served as a judge ✅
• (d) Any High Court

• (a) Golaknath case (1967)
• (b) Kesavananda Bharati case (1973) ✅
• (c) Minerva Mills case (1980)
• (d) Maneka Gandhi case (1978)

• (a) Habeas Corpus
• (b) Mandamus ✅
• (c) Certiorari
• (d) Prohibition

• (a) The Prime Minister
• (b) The President ✅
• (c) Parliament
• (d) The outgoing Chief Justice

• (a) Article 14
• (b) Article 19
• (c) Article 21
• (d) Article 32 ✅

Judicial Review is the power of the judiciary to examine the constitutionality of legislative enactments and executive orders. If a law or action violates the Constitution, the court can declare it void (Article 13). It is a negative power — the court checks whether the legislature and executive have acted within constitutional limits. Judicial Activism goes further — it involves the judiciary proactively stepping in to protect rights, correct governance failures, and expand access to justice. PIL (Public Interest Litigation) is the primary tool of judicial activism. For example, the Supreme Court has issued directions on environmental protection, child labour, and corruption — areas where the executive has been inactive. While judicial review is constitutionally grounded, judicial activism is sometimes criticised as judicial overreach.

Both the Supreme Court (Article 32) and the High Courts (Article 226) can issue five types of writs: 1. Habeas Corpus ("produce the body") — Issued to authorities who have detained a person, requiring them to produce the detainee in court and justify the detention. If the detention is illegal, the person is freed. 2. Mandamus ("we command") — Issued to a public authority that has failed to perform a mandatory duty, commanding it to do so. 3. Prohibition — Issued by a higher court to a lower court or tribunal to prevent it from exceeding its jurisdiction or usurping authority. 4. Certiorari ("to be informed") — Issued by a higher court to quash the order of a lower court or tribunal that has exceeded its jurisdiction or violated natural justice. 5. Quo Warranto ("by what authority") — Issued to challenge a person's right to hold a public office. If the person cannot justify their claim, the court can remove them.

Under Article 124(3), a person must satisfy any one of the following qualifications: - Must be a citizen of India, AND - Must have been a judge of a High Court (or two or more such courts) for at least five years, OR - Must have been an advocate of a High Court (or two or more such courts) for at least ten years, OR - Must be, in the opinion of the President, a distinguished jurist. Note: There is no minimum age requirement, and no requirement to be a judge first. A distinguished advocate can be directly appointed as a Supreme Court judge.

Under Article 131, the Supreme Court has original jurisdiction in any dispute: - Between the Government of India and one or more states - Between the Government of India and any state or states on one side and one or more other states on the other - Between two or more states In such disputes, the Supreme Court acts as the first and only court — no other court can hear these cases. This jurisdiction ensures that federal disputes between the centre and states are resolved at the highest level. However, this does not apply to disputes arising out of any treaty, agreement, or other instrument entered into before the commencement of the Constitution.

The Collegium system is the method by which judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts are appointed in India: - Supreme Court Collegium: Chief Justice of India + 4 senior-most judges of the Supreme Court - High Court Collegium: Chief Justice of the High Court + 2 senior-most judges of that High Court The Collegium recommends names for appointment, and the President (on the advice of the government) formally appoints them. The government can return a recommendation for reconsideration once, but if the Collegium reiterates the name, the government is bound to appoint. Controversy: - Critics argue it lacks transparency — there are no defined criteria, no public scrutiny, and no accountability mechanism. - The system is not mentioned in the Constitution — it was created by judicial interpretation in the Three Judges Cases. - Parliament attempted to replace it with the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) through the 99th Amendment (2014), but the Supreme Court struck down both the Amendment and the NJAC Act in 2015, upholding the Collegium as part of the Constitution's basic structure. - Supporters argue it protects judicial independence from political interference.

The Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973) is the most significant case in Indian constitutional history. A 13-judge bench (by a 7-6 majority) held that: - Parliament has the power to amend any part of the Constitution under Article 368. - However, Parliament cannot alter the "basic structure" or "basic framework" of the Constitution. The basic structure includes (as evolved through later cases): - Supremacy of the Constitution - Rule of law - Separation of powers - Judicial review - Federal character - Secularism - Sovereignty and integrity of India - Democratic republic - Fundamental rights (core) This case is significant because it established the principle that even a constitutional amendment cannot destroy the identity of the Constitution. It provides a check against majoritarian abuse of the amendment process.

Structure: The Supreme Court of India, established under Article 124, consists of the Chief Justice of India and such other judges as Parliament may prescribe. The current sanctioned strength is 34 judges (including the CJI). Judges are appointed by the President on the advice of the Collegium. A judge holds office until the age of 65 and can be removed only through impeachment (Article 124(4)). Jurisdiction: 1. Original Jurisdiction (Article 131): The Supreme Court has exclusive original jurisdiction in disputes between: - The Government of India and one or more states - The Government of India and any state(s) on one side vs. other state(s) - Between two or more states No other court can hear such disputes. 2. Appellate Jurisdiction (Articles 132–134): The Supreme Court hears appeals against High Court decisions in: - Constitutional cases (Article 132) — where a High Court certifies that the case involves a substantial question of law regarding the interpretation of the Constitution. - Civil cases (Article 133) — where a High Court certifies that the case involves a substantial question of law of general importance. - Criminal cases (Article 134) — where a High Court has reversed an acquittal and sentenced a person to death, or withdrawn a case from a subordinate court and sentenced a person to death or imprisonment for 10+ years. The Supreme Court can also grant Special Leave to Appeal (Article 136) against any judgment of any court or tribunal — this is a discretionary power that makes the Supreme Court the ultimate appellate authority. 3. Advisory Jurisdiction (Article 143): The President may refer any question of law or fact of public importance to the Supreme Court for its advisory opinion. The opinion is not binding but carries great weight. 4. Writ Jurisdiction (Article 32): The Supreme Court can issue writs (Habeas Corpus, Mandamus, Prohibition, Certiorari, Quo Warranto) for the enforcement of fundamental rights. Dr. Ambedkar called Article 32 "the most important article of the Constitution — without it, the Constitution is null and void." 5. Court of Record (Article 129): The Supreme Court is a court of record — its decisions are recorded and serve as precedents. It can punish for contempt of court. 6. Review Jurisdiction (Article 137): The Supreme Court can review its own judgments to correct errors.

The judiciary, particularly the Supreme Court, is called the guardian of the Constitution because it has the power to ensure that all branches of government — legislature and executive — act within constitutional limits. This role is exercised through judicial review, writ jurisdiction, and the basic structure doctrine. Key Mechanisms: 1. Judicial Review (Articles 13, 32, 226) — Any law or executive action that violates the Constitution can be struck down. 2. Writ Jurisdiction — Citizens can approach the court directly for enforcement of fundamental rights. 3. Basic Structure Doctrine — Even constitutional amendments cannot alter the Constitution's basic structure. 4. PIL (Public Interest Litigation) — Relaxed locus standi rules allow any person to seek justice for the marginalised. Landmark Cases: 1. Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973): - Established the basic structure doctrine — Parliament cannot amend the Constitution to destroy its fundamental features. - Prevented majoritarian abuse of the amendment process. 2. Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978): - Expanded the scope of Article 21 (right to life and personal liberty). - Held that the right to life includes the right to live with dignity, and any law depriving life or liberty must be just, fair, and reasonable. - Significantly expanded judicial review under Articles 14, 19, and 21. 3. Minerva Mills v. Union of India (1980): - Struck down clauses 4 and 5 of the 42nd Amendment that attempted to limit judicial review and give unlimited amendment power to Parliament. - Reaffirmed that judicial review is part of the basic structure. 4. Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan (1997): - Laid down guidelines to prevent sexual harassment at the workplace, effectively creating law where legislation was absent. - Example of judicial activism filling a legislative vacuum. 5. S.R. Bommai v. Union of India (1994): - Restricted the misuse of Article 356 (President's Rule) by holding that the President's satisfaction is subject to judicial review. - Strengthened federalism as part of the basic structure. 6. Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association v. Union of India (2015): - Struck down the NJAC and the 99th Amendment, upholding the Collegium system and judicial primacy in appointments. - Protected judicial independence from political interference. Conclusion: Through these landmark judgments, the judiciary has protected the Constitution against legislative and executive overreach, expanded fundamental rights, and ensured that democracy and federalism are preserved. However, critics argue that judicial activism can sometimes cross into policy-making territory that belongs to the elected branches.

Comparison of Jurisdiction: | Feature | Supreme Court | High Court | |---|---|---| | Established under | Article 124 | Article 214 | | Writ jurisdiction | Article 32 (only for fundamental rights) | Article 226 (for fundamental rights AND any other purpose) | | Territorial scope | Entire India | State or Union Territory | | Original jurisdiction | Article 131 (Centre-State disputes) | Limited original jurisdiction (company law, contempt, etc.) | | Appellate jurisdiction | From any court/tribunal (Article 136 SLP) | From subordinate courts within the state | | Advisory jurisdiction | Article 143 (President's reference) | Not available | | Court of record | Yes (Article 129) | Yes (Article 215) | Key Difference in Writ Jurisdiction: - The Supreme Court can issue writs only for the enforcement of fundamental rights (Article 32). - High Courts can issue writs for the enforcement of fundamental rights AND for any other purpose (Article 226). - This makes the High Court's writ jurisdiction wider than the Supreme Court's, but the Supreme Court's jurisdiction extends across India while each High Court is limited to its territorial jurisdiction. Five Types of Writs (available to both): 1. Habeas Corpus — "Produce the body." Issued when a person is illegally detained. The authority holding the person must produce them in court and justify the detention. Example: Used during the Emergency (1975–77) — in ADM Jabalpur v. Shivkant Shukla, the Supreme Court controversially denied habeas corpus during the Emergency, a decision later criticised. 2. Mandamus — "We command." Issued to a public authority that has failed to perform a mandatory legal duty. Example: Court directing a municipality to provide clean drinking water. 3. Prohibition — Issued by a higher court to a lower court or tribunal to prevent it from exceeding its jurisdiction. It is preventive — it stops a court from doing something it has no power to do. 4. Certiorari — "To be informed." Issued by a higher court to quash the order of a lower court or tribunal that has acted beyond its jurisdiction or violated principles of natural justice. It is corrective — it annuls an order already made. 5. Quo Warranto — "By what authority." Issued to challenge a person's right to hold a public office. If the person cannot show valid authority, the court can remove them. Example: Challenging an unqualified person appointed as a municipal commissioner.

Judicial independence is a basic feature of the Indian Constitution (as held in the S.R. Bommai case and others). Without independence, the judiciary cannot effectively protect citizens' rights or restrain executive overreach. Constitutional Safeguards for Judicial Independence: 1. Security of Tenure (Article 124(4)): - A judge of the Supreme Court or High Court cannot be removed except by impeachment — a process requiring a two-thirds majority in both Houses of Parliament on grounds of proved misbehaviour or incapacity. - No judge has ever been impeached and removed in India (Justice Soumitra Sen's impeachment process was initiated but he resigned before completion). 2. Financial Independence (Article 125): - The salaries and allowances of Supreme Court judges are charged on the Consolidated Fund of India — they are not subject to parliamentary vote. - Their salaries cannot be diminished during their term of office (Article 125(2)). 3. Ban on Post-Retirement Practice (Articles 124(7) and 220): - A retired Supreme Court judge cannot practise in any court or before any authority in India. - A retired High Court judge cannot practise in the High Court where they served (Article 220). 4. Appointment Process (Collegium System): - Judges are appointed by the President on the advice of the Collegium, not by the executive alone. - The 99th Amendment (NJAC) was struck down in 2015 to preserve judicial primacy in appointments. 5. Powers of the Supreme Court (Articles 129, 141): - The Supreme Court is a court of record with power to punish for contempt (Article 129). - Its decisions are binding on all courts in India (Article 141). 6. Separation from Legislature and Executive: - A sitting judge cannot hold any office of profit (Article 124(4)). - Judges are barred from political activity. - The judiciary has its own independent administrative machinery. 7. Power to Review (Article 137): - The Supreme Court can review its own judgments, ensuring self-correction without external pressure. Challenges to Judicial Independence: - Delay in appointments (vacancies remain unfilled for long periods). - Post-retirement appointments to government positions (tribunals, commissions) — critics argue this creates a conflict of interest. - Attempts to create an alternative appointment mechanism (NJAC) were struck down, but the debate continues. - Delay in declaration of assets by judges (resolved partly by resolutions in 1997 and 2009). Despite these challenges, the Indian judiciary has largely maintained its independence and remains a powerful check on the other branches of government.