GS Paper II

News Excerpt:

Recently, CJI D.Y. Chandrachud announced his intent to create Constitution Benches of varied strengths as a permanent feature of the Court.

Working of the Supreme Court:

• The Supreme Court of India has three jurisdictions under the Constitution: Original, Appellate, and Advisory. The Supreme Court serves as a Constitutional Court and primarily as a Court of Appeal.
• Appellate Jurisdiction: It hears matters between the Centre and the States and between two or more States' rules on civil and criminal appeals.
• Advisory Jurisdiction: It provides legal and factual advice to the President.
• Original Jurisdiction: According to Article 32, any person can immediately file a petition at the Supreme Court if they consider their basic rights have been infringed.
• Article 145(3) of the Constitution provides for the setting up a Constitution Bench. 
• It says a minimum of five judges need to sit to decide a case involving a “substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution” or for hearing any reference under Article 143, which deals with the power of the President to consult the Court.
• Today’s Supreme Court issues around 8-10 decisions annually through Constitution Benches of five or more judges.
• Only four of the 1,263 decisions issued in 2022 were issued by a Constitution Bench.
• The Court sits in benches of varying sizes, as determined by the Registry on the directions of the Chief Justice of India (CJI), the Master of the Roster.

Issues identified:

• Frivolous PILs: The Supreme Court has faced numerous frivolous public interest litigations, including demands to remove secularism from the Preamble to the Constitution, etc.
• Limited Judicial Access: Despite their best efforts to provide wide access to the Supreme Court, judges have inadvertently limited access to justice, particularly for under-resourced groups.
• Delayed Justice: Delays can be incentives and disincentives for parties involved in litigation, with the well-resourced but legally weaker parties benefiting from the delays.
• Political Influence: The Chief Justices are known to influence the outcomes of important cases by using their administrative powers of case assignment.
  • Some lawyers have gained such influence that the court gives them more hearings, even when their cases are weaker.
• Institutional Instability: Short tenures and early retirements contribute to institutional instability and encourage judges to comply with the government of the day.
  • The appointment and transfer of judges in India is carried out through the collegium system, which has been criticised for its opaque functioning.
  • Since the inception of the Supreme Court, only 11 women have been appointed as judges, and none as Chief Justices.
• Pending cases across various courts in the country are approaching the five crore mark.

• • According to the law minister, as of December 31, 2022, the total number of pending cases in district and subordinate courts was pegged at over 4.32 crore.
  • The Supreme Court is currently handling an overwhelming number of pending cases, with 79,813 cases awaiting verdicts from the 34 judges. This has led to repeated calls for structural changes in the top court.

Way forward:

• In 1984, the Tenth Law Commission of India proposed splitting the Supreme Court into the Constitutional and Legal divisions. This would make justice more accessible and reduce litigants' fees.
• Eleventh Law Commission 1988 stated that dividing the Supreme Court into parts would make justice more widely available and significantly decrease litigants' fees.
  • The top court mostly handles matters from nearby high courts, while courts far away have fewer appeals due to accessibility and costs. That is, appeals from the Punjab and Haryana High Court, Allahabad High Court, and Delhi High Court formed the major chunk of matters.
• In Bihar Legal Support Society v. Chief Justice of India (1986), the Supreme Court proposed establishing a National Court of Appeal to entertain special leave petitions, allowing it only to address constitutional and public law-related questions.
• The 229th Law Commission Report (2009) recommended four regional benches in Delhi, Chennai, Hyderabad, Kolkata, and Mumbai to hear non-constitutional issues, with six judges from each region taking appellate responsibility.
  • This would allow the Supreme Court to deal with constitutional issues and other cases of national importance on a daily basis.
• A Constitution Bench (V. Vasanthkumar v. H.C. Bhatia) is analysing the issues and contemplating measures to protect citizens' basic right to access the Supreme Court.
• Need for All India Judicial Services:
  • The First Law Commission and 8th Law Commission recommended AIJS for efficiency and trial court arrears. Chief Justice Conferences supported AIJS, and the Supreme Court suggested implementing recommendations for judiciary health.
    • India faces a shortage of judges in its subordinate courts, with around 35% of vacant posts. This has led to a poor judge-to-population ratio, with only 17 judges per million people.