Date post: | 05-Apr-2018 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | dinesh-kumar |
View: | 222 times |
Download: | 0 times |
of 15
7/31/2019 Detail About Supreme Court of India
1/15
Supreme Court of India
Established 26 January 1950
Jurisdiction India
Location New Delhi
Coordinates 28.622237N 77.239584E
Composition
method
Executive selection (Qualifications
imposed)
Authorized by Constitution of India
Decisions areappealed to
President of India forClemency/Commutation of
sentence
Judge term
length
65 years of age
Number of
positions
31 (30+1)
Website supremecourtofindia.nic.in
(http://supremecourtofindia.nic.in/)
Motto
Whence dharma, thence
victory.
Chief Justice of India
Currently S. H. Kapadia
Since 2010-05-12
Lead position 2012-09-28(Month turning 01)
Supreme Court of IndiaFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Supreme Court of India is the highest judicial forum
and final court of appeal as established by Part V, Chapter
IV of the Constitution of India. According to the Constitution
of India, the role of the Supreme Court is that of a federal
court and guardian of the Constitution.
Articles 124 to 147 of the Constitution of India lay down the
composition and jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of India.
The Supreme Court is meant to be the last resort and highest
appellate court which takes up appeals against judgments of
the High Courts of the states and territories. Also, disputes
between states or petitions involving a serious infringement of
fundamental and human rights are usually brought directly to
the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court of India held its
inaugural sitting on 28 January 1950, and since then has
delivered more than 24,000 reported judgments.
Contents
1 Constitution of the court
2 The Supreme Court Building and its
Architecture
3 Composition
4 Jurisdiction4.1 Original jurisdiction
4.2 Appellate jurisdiction
4.3 Advisory jurisdiction
5 Judicial independence
5.1 Powers to punish contempt
6 Jammu and Kashmir
7 Landmark judgements: Judiciary-Legislature
confrontations
7.1 Land reform (early
confrontation)
7.2 Other laws deemed
unconstitutional
7.2.1 Response from
Parliament
7.2.2 Counter-response
from the Supreme Court
8 Emergency and Government of India
8.1 Post-1980: an assertive
Su reme Court
Coordinates: 28.622237N 77.239584E
12/31/2011 Supreme Court of India - Wikipedia, the
wikipedia.org//Supreme_Court_of_I 1/
7/31/2019 Detail About Supreme Court of India
2/15
ends
Jurist term
ends
2012-09-28(Month turning 01)
Republic of India
This article is p art of the series:
Politics and Government of
India
Constitution of India
Fundamental Rights
ExecutivePresident
Vice President
Prime Minister
The Cabinet
Parliament
Rajya S abhaThe Chairman
Lok S abhaThe Speaker
Judiciary
Supreme Court of IndiaChief Justice of India
High CourtsDistrict Courts
Election Commission
Chief Election Commissioner
National Parties
State Parties
National CoalitionsLeft Front
National Democratic Alliance(NDA)
United Progressive Alliance
Supreme Court of India - Central Wing
8.2 Recent important cases
9 Corruption and misconduct of judges
9.1 Senior judges
9.2 Senior government officials
10 Sitting judges of the court
10.1 Honourable Chief Justice
10.2 Honourable Judges
11 Past Chief Justices of India12 See also
13 References
14 External links
Constitution of the court
On 28 January 1950, two days after India became a sovereign democratic
republic, the Supreme Court came into being. The inauguration took place in the
Chamber of Princes in the Parliament building. The Chamber of Princes had
earlier been the seat of the Federal Court of India for 12 years, between 1937
and 1950, and was the seat of the Supreme Court until the Supreme Court
acquired its present premises in 1958.
The Supreme Court of India replaced both the Federal Court of India and the
Judicial Committee of the Privy Council at the apex of the Indian court system.
After its inauguration on 28 January 1950, the Supreme Court commenced its
sittings in the Chamber of Princes in the Parliament House. The Court moved
into the present building in 1958. The Supreme Court Bar Association is the barof the highest court. The current president of the SCBA is Mr. Pravin Parekh.
Mr. Sanjay Bansal is the present Honorary Secretary of SCBA.
The Supreme Court
Building and its
Architecture
The main block of the Supreme
Court building was built on asquare plot of 22 acres and the
building was designed by chief
architect Ganesh Bhikaji
Deolalikar who was the first
Indian to head CPWD and
designed the Supreme Court
Building in an Indo British
architectural style. He was
succeeded by Shridher Krishna Joglekar. The Court moved into the present
Union Government
Elections
Political Parties
12/31/2011 Supreme Court of India - Wikipedia, the
wikipedia.org//Supreme_Court_of_I 2/
7/31/2019 Detail About Supreme Court of India
3/15
Governor
State Legislature
Vidhan Sabha
Vidhan Parishad
Panchayat
Gram panchayat
Panchayat samiti
Zilla Parishad
Other countries Politics Portal
Government of India Portal
Supreme Court of India
building in 1958. The building is shaped to project the image of scales of justice
with the Central Wing of the building corresponding to the centre beam of the
Scales. In 1979, two new wingsthe East Wing and the West Wingwere
added to the complex. In all there are 15[1] court rooms in the various wings of
the building. The Chief Justice's Court is the largest of the courtroom located in
the centre of the Central Wing. It has a large dome with a high ceiling.
CompositionAs originally enacted, the Constitution of India provided for a Supreme Court
with a Chief Justice and seven lower-ranking Judgesleaving it to Parliament to
increase this number. In the early years, a full bench of the Supreme Court sat
together to hear the cases presented before them. As the work of the Court
increased and cases began to accumulate, Parliament increased the number of
Judges from the original eight in 1950 to eleven in 1956,
fourteen in 1960, eighteen in 1978, twenty-six in 1986 and
thirty-one in 2008. As the number of the Judges has
increased, they have sat in smaller Benches of two or three
(referred to as aDivision Bench)coming together in
larger Benches of five or more (referred to as a
Constitutional Bench) only when required to settle
fundamental questions of law. Any bench may refer the case
under consideration up to a larger bench if the need to do so
arises.
The Supreme Court of India comprises the Chief Justice of
India and not more than thirty other Judges appointed by the
President of India. However, the President must appoint
judges in consultation with the Supreme Court, andappointments are generally made on the basis of seniority and not political preference. Supreme Court Judges retire
at the age of 65.
In order to be appointed as a Judge of the Supreme Court, a person must be a citizen of India and must have been,
for at least five years, a Judge of a High Court or of two or more such Courts in succession, or an Advocate of a
High Court or of two or more such Courts in succession for at least ten years, or the person must be, in the opinion
of the President, a distinguished jurist. Provisions exist for the appointment of a Judge of a High Court as an ad-hoc
Judge of the Supreme Court and for retired Judges of the Supreme Court or High Courts to sit and act as Judges of
that Court.
The Supreme Court has always maintained a wide regional representation. It also has had a good share of Judges
belonging to religious and ethnic minorities. The first woman to be appointed to the Supreme Court was Justice
Fatima Beevi in 1987. She was later followed by Justices Sujata Manohar, Ruma Pal and Gyan Sudha Mishra.
Justice Ranjana Desai, who was elevated from the Bombay High Court is the most recent woman judge in the
Supreme Court, so that for the first time there were two women (Mishra and Desai) simultaneously in the Supreme
Court.
In 2000 Justice K. G. Balakrishnan became the first judge from the dalitcommunity. In 2007 he also became the
first dalitChief Justice of India. Justices B. P. Jeevan Reddy and A. R. Lakshmanan were appointed Chairmen of
the Law Commission of India, unusually because neither of them had served as Chief Justice. Justice J. S. Kehar is
Local & State Govt.
12/31/2011 Supreme Court of India - Wikipedia, the
wikipedia.org//Supreme_Court_of_I 3/
7/31/2019 Detail About Supreme Court of India
4/15
slated to become the first Sikh Chief Justice of India in 2017.
Jurisdiction
The Supreme Court has original, appellate and advisory jurisdiction under Articles 32, 131-144 of the Constitution.
Original jurisdiction
The court has exclusive original jurisdiction over any dispute between the Government of India and one or more
States or between the Government of India and any State or States on one side and one or more States on the
other or between two or more States, if and insofar as the dispute involves any question (whether of law or of fact)
on which the existence or extent of a legal right depends. In addition, Article 32 of the Constitution grants an
extensive original jurisdiction to the Supreme Court in regard to enforcement of Fundamental Rights. It is
empowered to issue directions, orders or writs, including writs in the nature ofhabeas corpus, mandamus,
prohibition, quo warranto and certiorari to enforce them.
Appellate jurisdiction
The appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court can be invoked by a certificate granted by the High Court
concerned under Articles 132(1), 133(1) or 134 of the Constitution in respect of any judgment, decree or final
order of a High Court in both civil and criminal cases, involving substantial questions of law as to the interpretation
of the Constitution. The Supreme Court can also grant special leave under article 136(1) to appeal from a judgment
or order of any non-military Indian court. Parliament has the power to enlarge the appellate jurisdiction of the
Supreme Court and has exercised this power in case of criminal appeals by enacting the Supreme Court
(Enlargement of Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction) Act, 1970.
Appeals also lie to the Supreme Court in civil matters if the High Court concerned certifies : (a) that the case
involves a substantial question of law of general importance, and (b) that, in the opinion of the High Court, the said
question needs to be decided by the Supreme Court. In criminal cases, an appeal lies to the Supreme Court if theHigh Court (a) has on appeal reversed an order of acquittal of an accused person and sentenced him to death or to
imprisonment for life or for a period of not less than 10 years, or (b) has withdrawn for trial before itself any case
from any Court subordinate to its authority and has in such trial convicted the accused and sentenced him to death
or to imprisonment for life or for a period of not less than 10 years, or (c) certified that the case is a fit one for
appeal to the Supreme Court. Parliament is authorised to confer on the Supreme Court any further powers to
entertain and hear appeals from any judgment, final order or sentence in a criminal proceeding of a High Court.
Advisory jurisdiction
The Supreme Court has special advisory jurisdiction in matters which may specifically be referred to it by thePresident of India under Article 143 of the Constitution.There are provisions for reference or appeal to this Court
under Article 317(1) of the Constitution, Section 257 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, Section 7(2) of the
Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969, Section 130-A of the Customs Act, 1962, Section 35-H
of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 and Section 82C of the Gold (Control) Act, 1968. Appeals also lie to
the Supreme Court under the Representation of the People Act, 1951, Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices
Act, 1969, Advocates Act, 1961, Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, Customs Act, 1962, Central Excises and Salt
Act, 1944, Enlargement of Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction Act, 1970, Trial of Offences Relating to Transactions in
Securities Act, 1992, Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 and Consumer Protection Act,
1986. Election Petitions under Part III of the Presidential and Vice Presidential Elections Act, 1952 are also filed
12/31/2011 Supreme Court of India - Wikipedia, the
wikipedia.org//Supreme_Court_of_I 4/
7/31/2019 Detail About Supreme Court of India
5/15
directly in the Supreme Court. Under Order XL of the Supreme Court Rules the Supreme Court may review its
judgment or order but no application for review is to be entertained in a civil proceeding except on the grounds
mentioned in Order XLVII, Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure and in a criminal proceeding except on the
ground of an error apparent on the face of the record. =
The Supreme Court has the power to transfer the cases from one High Court to another and even from one District
Court of a particular state to another District Court of the other state. In such transfer cases the Hon'ble Supreme
Court transfer only those cases if they really lack appropriate territorial jurisdiction and those cases which were
otherwise supposed to be filed under the
Judicial independence
The Constitution seeks to ensure the independence of Supreme Court Judges in various ways. Judges are generally
appointed on the basis of seniority and not on political preference. A Judge of the Supreme Court cannot be
removed from office except by an order of the President passed after an address in each House of Parliament
supported by a majority of the total membership of that House and by a majority of not less than two-thirds of
members present and voting, and presented to the President in the same Session for such removal on the ground of
proved misbehaviour or incapacity. The salary and allowances of a judge of the Supreme Court cannot be reduced
after appointment. A person who has been a Judge of the Supreme Court is debarred from practising in any courtof law or before any other authority in India.
Powers to punish contempt
Under Articles 129 and 142 of the Constitution the Supreme Court has been vested with power to punish anyone
for contempt of any law court in India including itself. The Supreme Court performed an unprecedented action
when it directed a sitting Minister of the state of Maharashtra, Swaroop Singh Naik, [2] to be jailed for 1 month on a
charge of contempt of court on 12 May 2006. This was the first time that a serving Minister was ever jailed.[3][4]
Jammu and Kashmir
With reference to the State of Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) it would be relevant to note that, J&K has for various
historical reasons a special status vis-a-vis the other states of India. Article 370 of the Constitution of India carves
out certain exceptions for J&K. The Constitution of India is not fully applicable to the state of J&K. This is the
effect of Article 370. The Constitution of India is applicable to the state of J&K with various modifications and
exceptions. These are provided for in the Constitution (Application to Jammu and Kashmir) Order, 1954. Also,
Jammu and Kashmir, unlike the other Indian states, also has its own Constitution. Although the Constitution of India
is applicable to Jammu and Kashmir with numerous modifications, the Constitution (Application to Jammu and
Kashmir) Order, 1954 makes Article 141 applicable to the state of J&K and hence law declared by Supreme
Court is equally applicable to all courts of J&K including the High Court.
Landmark judgements: Judiciary-Legislature confrontations
Land reform (early confrontation)
After some of the courts overturned state laws redistributing land fromzamindar(landlord) estates on the grounds
that the laws violated the zamindars' fundamental rights, the Parliament of India passed the First Amendment to the
Constitution in 1951 followed by the Fourth Amendment in 1955 to protect its authority to implement land
12/31/2011 Supreme Court of India - Wikipedia, the
wikipedia.org//Supreme_Court_of_I 5/
7/31/2019 Detail About Supreme Court of India
6/15
redistribution. The Supreme Court countered these amendments in 1967 when it ruled in Golaknath v. State of
Punjab[5] that Parliament did not have the power to abrogate fundamental rights, including the provisions on private
property.[6]
Other laws deemed unconstitutional
On 1 February 1970, the Supreme Court invalidated the government-sponsored Bank Nationalization
Bill that had been passed by Parliament in August 1969.
The Supreme Court also rejected as unconstitutional a presidential order of 7 September 1970, that
abolished the titles, privileges, and privy purses of the former rulers of India's old princely states.
Response from Parliament
In reaction to the decisions of the Supreme Court, in 1971 the Parliament of India passed an amendment
empowering itself to amend any provision of the constitution, including the fundamental rights.
The Parliament of India passed the 25th Amendment, making legislative decisions concerning proper
land compensation non-justiciable.
The Parliament of India passed an amendment to the Constitution of India, which added a constitutional
article abolishing princely privileges and privy purses.
Counter-response from the Supreme Court
The Court ruled that the basic structure of the constitution cannot be altered for convenience. On 24 April 1973,
the Supreme Court responded to the parliamentary offensive by ruling inKesavananda Bharati v. The State of
Kerala that although these amendments were constitutional, the court still reserved for itself the discretion to reject
any constitutional amendments passed by Parliament by declaring that the amendments cannot change the
constitution's "basic structure", a decision piloted through by Chief Justice Sikri.
Emergency and Government of India
The independence of judiciary was severely curtailed on account of powerful central government ruled by Indian
ational Congress.[7] This was during the Indian Emergency (1975-1977) of Indira Gandhi. The constitutional
rights of imprisoned persons were restricted under Preventive detention laws passed by the parliament. In the case
of Shiva Kant ShuklaAdditional District Magistrate of Jabalpur v. Shiv Kant Shukla
(http://openarchive.in/judis/5622.htm) , popularly known as theHabeas Corpus case, a bench of five seniormostjudges of Supreme court ruled in favour of state's right for unrestricted powers of detention during emergency.
Justices A.N. Ray, P. N. Bhagwati, Y. V. Chandrachud, and M.H. Beg, stated in the majority decision:[8]
(under the declaration of emergency) no person has any locus to move any writ petition under Art. 226 before
a High Court for habeas corpus or any other writ or order or direction to challenge the legality of an order of
detention.
The only dissenting opinion was from Justice H. R. Khanna, who stated:
detention without trial is an anathema to all those who love personal liberty... A dissent is an appeal to the
12/31/2011 Supreme Court of India - Wikipedia, the
wikipedia.org//Supreme_Court_of_I 6/
7/31/2019 Detail About Supreme Court of India
7/15
brooding spirit of the law, to the intelligence of a future day, when a later decision may possibly correct the
error into which the dissenting Judge believes the court to have been betrayed.[8]
It is believed that before delivering his dissenting opinion, Justice Khanna had mentioned to his sister:I have
prepared my judgment, which is going to cost me the Chief Justice-ship of India."[9] When the central
Government is to recommend one of Supreme court Judges for the post of Chief Justice in January 1977,Justice
Khanna was superseded despite being the most senior judge at the time and thereby Government broke the
convention of appointing only the senior most judge to the position of Chief Justice of India. In fact, it was felt that
the other judges may have gone along for this very reason. Justice Khanna remains a legendary figure among thelegal fraternity in India for this decision.
The New York Times, wrote of this opinion: "The submission of an independent judiciary to absolutist government
is virtually the last step in the destruction of a democratic society; and the Indian Supreme Court's decision appears
close to utter surrender."
During the emergency period, the government also passed the 39th amendment, which sought to limit judicial review
for the election of the Prime Minister; only a body constituted by Parliament could review this election.[10] The court
tamely agreed with this curtailment (1975), despite the earlier Keshavanand decision. Subsequently, the parliament,
with most opposition members in jail during the emergency, passed the 42nd Amendment which prevented anycourt from reviewing any amendment to the constitution with the exception of procedural issues concerning
ratification. A few years after the emergency, however, the Supreme court rejected the absoluteness of the 42nd
amendment and reaffirmed its power of judicial review in theMinerva Mills (http://openarchive.in/judis/4488.htm)
case (1980).
As a final act during the emergency, in what Justice V. R. Krishna Iyer has called "a stab on the independence of
the High Court",[7] judges were moved helter-skelter across the country, in concurrence with Chief Justice Beg.
Post-1980: an assertive Supreme Court
Fortunately for Indian jurisprudence, the "brooding spirit of the law" referred to by Justice Khanna was to correct
the excesses of the emergency soon enough.
After Indira Gandhi lost elections in 1977, the new government of Morarji Desai, and especially law minister Shanti
Bhushan (who had earlier argued for the detenues in the Habeas Corpus case), introduced a number of
amendments making it more difficult to declare and sustain an emergency, and reinstated much of the power to the
Supreme Court. It is said that the Basic Structure doctrine, created inKesavananda, was strengthened inIndira
Gandhi's case and set in stone inMinerva Mills (http://openarchive.in/judis/4488.htm) .
The Supreme Court's creative and expansive interpretations of Article 21 (Life and Personal Liberty), primarily
after the Emergency period, have given rise to a new jurisprudence of public interest litigation that has vigorouslypromoted many important economic and social rights (constitutionally protected but not enforceable) including, but
not restricted to, the rights to free education, livelihood, a clean environment, food and many others. Civil and
political rights (traditionally protected in the Fundamental Rights chapter of the Indian Constitution) have also been
expanded and more fiercely protected. These new interpretations have opened the avenue for litigation on a number
of important issues. It is interesting to note that the pioneer of the expanded interpretation of Article 21, Chief
Justice P N Bhagwati, was also one of the judges who heard the ADM Jabalpur case, and held that the Right to
Life could not be claimed in Emergency
Recent important cases
12/31/2011 Supreme Court of India - Wikipedia, the
wikipedia.org//Supreme_Court_of_I 7/
7/31/2019 Detail About Supreme Court of India
8/15
Among the important pronouncements of the Supreme Court post 2000 is the Coelho case (I.R. Coelho v. State of
Tamil Nadu (Judgment of 11the January, 2007). A unanimous Bench of 9 judges reaffirmed the basic structure
doctrine. An authority on the Indian Constitution, former Attorney-General Soli Sorabjee commented on the
judgment, "The judgment in I.R. Coelho vigorously reaffirms the doctrine of basic structure. Indeed it has gone
further and held that a constitutional amendment which entails violation of any fundamental rights which the Court
regards as forming part of the basic structure of the Constitution then the same can be struck down depending upon
its impact and consequences. The judgment clearly imposes further limitations on the constituent power of
Parliament with respect to the principles underlying certain fundamental rights. The judgment in Coelho has in effect
restored the decision in Golak Nath regarding non-amendability of the Constitution on account of infraction of
fundamental rights, contrary to the judgment in Kesavananda Bharatis case.
Another important decision was of the five-judge Bench in Ashoka Kumara Thakur v. Union of India; where the
constitutional validity of Central Educational Institutions (Reservations in Admissions) Act, 2006 was upheld,
subject to the "creamy layer" criteria. Importantly, the Court refused to follow the 'strict scrutiny' standards of
review followed by the United States Supreme Court. At the same time, the Court has applied the strict scrutiny
standards in Anuj Garg v. Hotel Association of India (2007) ([2] (http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?
abstract_id=1246892) )
In Aravalli Golf Course and other cases, the Supreme Court (particularly Justice Markandey Katju) has expressedreservations about taking on an increasingly activst role.
In extraordinary situations where corruption in allotment of mobile licenses has caused an estimated astronomical
loss of Rs 1,76,000 crores, a Bench comprising Justices G S Singhvi and A K Ganguly told CBI to inform who the
beneficiaries and conspirators in parking funds in foreign bank accounts were.[11] The government refused to
disclose details of about 18 Indians holding accounts in LGT Bank, Liechtenstein, evoking a sharp response from a
Bench comprising Justices B Sudershan Reddy and S S Nijjar to Make up your mind whether you can make the
disclosure. The Solicitor General of India replied that it will be done at the appropriate stage.[11][12][13]
Corruption and misconduct of judges
The year 2008 has seen the Supreme Court in one controversy after another, from serious allegations of corruption
at the highest level of the judiciary,[14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31] expensive private
holidays at the tax payers expense,[32] refusal to divulge details of judges' assets to the public,[33][34][35][36][37][38]
secrecy in the appointments of judges',[39][40][41][42] to even refusal to make information public under the Right to
Information Act.[43][44][45][46][47] The Chief Justice of India K.G.Balakrishnan invited a lot of criticism for his
comments on his post not being that of a public servant, but that of a constitutional authority.[48] He later went back
on this stand.[49] The judiciary has come in for serious criticisms from both the current President of India Pratibha
Patil and the former President APJ Abdul Kalam for failure in handling its duties.[50] The Prime Minister,
Dr.Manmohan Singh, has stated that corruption is one of the major challenges facing the judiciary, and suggested
that there is an urgent need to eradicate this menace.[51]
The Cabinet Secretary of the Indian Government has recently introduced the Judges Inquiry (Amendment) Bill
2008 in Parliament for setting up of a panel called the National Judicial Council, headed by the Chief Justice of
India, that will probe into allegations of corruption and misconduct by High Court and Supreme Court judges.
However, even this bill is allegedly a farce, just meant to silence and suppress the public. As per this Bill, a panel of
judges themselves will be judging the judges,this inquiry can be initiated against the Chief Justice of India or against
retired judges by the order of President,Cabinet Secretary and Parliament then they are suspended.[52][53]
12/31/2011 Supreme Court of India - Wikipedia, the
wikipedia.org//Supreme_Court_of_I 8/
7/31/2019 Detail About Supreme Court of India
9/15
Senior judges
Supreme Court Bench, Justice B N Agrawal, Justice V S Sirpurkar and Justice G S Singhvi :
"We are not giving the certificate that no judge is corrupt. Black sheep are everywhere. It's only a
question of degree."[17][18]
Supreme Court Judge, Justice Agarwal:
"What about the character of politicians, lawyers and the society? We come from the same corrupt
society and do not descend from heaven. But it seems you have descended from heaven and are,
therefore, accusing us."[54]
Supreme Court Bench, Justice Arijit Pasayat, Justice V S Sirpurkar and Justice G S Singhvi :
"The time has come because people have started categorising some judges as very honest despite it
being the foremost qualification of any judge. It is the system. We have to find the mechanism to stem the
rot"[55]
"Has the existing mechanism become outdated? Should with some minor modification, the mechanism
could still be effective?"
Supreme Court Bench, Justice Justice G S Singhvi :
"The rot has set in." The judges appeared to be in agreement with senior advocate Anil Devan and
Solicitor General G. E. Vahanvati who, citing the falling standards, questioned the desirability of keeping
the immunity judges have from prosecution.[56][57]
Senior government officials
Former President of India, APJ Abdul Kalam:
"If longevity of cases continued, people would resort to extra-judicial measures."[58]
President of India, Pratibha Patil:At a seminar on judicial reforms[50]
"Judiciary cannot escape blame for delayed justice that is fraught with the risk of promoting the lynch
mob phenomenon."
"Time has come when we need to seriously introspect whether our judicial machinery has lived up to its
expectations of walking the enlightened way by securing complete justice to all and standing out as (a)
beacon of truth, faith and hope."
"Admittedly, the realm of judicial administration is not without its own share of inadequacies and
blemishes."
Former Chief Justice of India, Y. K. Sabharwal:"The justice delivery system has reached its nadir"[58]
Speaker of Lok Sabha, Miera Kumar:
"As a citizen of this country and as a lawyer who had practiced for many decades, it is a matter of agony
if there is even a whisper of an allegation against a judicial officer But the fact is that allegations against
judicial officers are becoming a reality. One Chief Justice has said that only 20 per cent of the judges are
corrupt. Another judge has lamented that there are no internal procedures to look into the allegations.
Therefore, the necessity of a mechanism is being emphasized by the judges themselves. Then the
question arises as to how this mechanism would be brought about and as to who would bring it. The fact
12/31/2011 Supreme Court of India - Wikipedia, the
wikipedia.org//Supreme_Court_of_I 9/
7/31/2019 Detail About Supreme Court of India
10/15
of the matter is that the judiciary is the only unique institution that has no accountability to the people in a
democracy. In this overall context, it is absolutely essential to involve outside elements in the process of
judicial accountability."[59]
Additional Solicitor General, G. E. Vahanvati:At a Delhi High Court hearing
"Declaration of assets by judges to the CJI are personal information which cannot be revealed under the
present RTI and the same should be amended accordingly."[60]
"It is submitted that the information which is sought (pertaining to judges assets) is purely and simply
personal information, the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity"[61][62]
Pranab Mukherjee:
"Constructive criticism should be encouraged." He joined the chorus on judicial delays that has resulted in people
taking law into their own hands. He underlined the need for strengthening judicial infrastructure.[63]
Sitting judges of the court
[64]
Honourable Chief Justice
1. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sarosh Homi Kapadia
Honourable Judges
1. Hon'ble Shri Justice Altamas Kabir
2. Hon'ble Shri Justice Dalveer Bhandari
3. Hon'ble Shri Justice D. K. Jain
4. Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sathasivam5. Hon'ble Shri Justice G. S. Singhvi
6. Hon'ble Shri Justice Aftab Alam
7. Hon'ble Shri Justice Cyriac Joseph
8. Hon'ble Shri Justice Asok Kumar Ganguly
9. Hon'ble Shri Justice R. M. Lodha
10. Hon'ble Shri Justice H. L. Dattu
11. Hon'ble Shri Justice Deepak Verma
12. Hon'ble Dr. Justice Balbir Singh Chauhan
13. Hon'ble Shri Justice A. K. Patnaik
14. Hon'ble Shri Justice T. S. Thakur15. Hon'ble Shri Justice K. S. P. Radhakrishnan
16. Hon'ble Shri Justice Surinder Singh Nijjar
17. Hon'ble Shri Justice Swatanter Kumar
18. Hon'ble Shri Justice Chandramouli Kumar Prasad
19. Hon'ble Shri Justice H. L. Gokhale
20. Hon'ble Smt. Justice Gyan Sudha Misra
21. Hon'ble Shri Justice A. R. Dave
22. Hon'ble Shri Justice S. J. Mukhopadhaya
23. Hon'ble Smt Justice Ranjana Desai
12/31/2011 Supreme Court of India - Wikipedia, the
wikipedia.org//Supreme_Court_of_I 10/
7/31/2019 Detail About Supreme Court of India
11/15
24. Hon'ble Shri Justice J. S. Khehar
25. Hon'ble Shri Justice Dipak Misra
26. Hon'ble Shri Justice Jasti Chelameswar
Past Chief Justices of India
Main article: Chief Justice of India
1. H. J. Kania 26-01-1950 to 06-01-1951
2. M. P. Shastri 07-01-1951 to 03-01-1954
3. Mehr Chand Mahajan
4. B. K. Mukherjee
5. Sudhi Ranjan Das
6. Bhuvaneshwar Prasad Sinha
7. P. B. Gajendragadkar
8. A. K. Sarkar
9. K. Subba Rao
10. K. N. Wanchoo11. M. Hidayatullah
12. J. C. Shah
13. S. M. Sikri
14. A. N. Ray
15. Mirza Hameedullah Beg
16. Y. V. Chandrachud
17. P. N. Bhagwati
18. R. S. Pathak
19. E. S. Venkataramiah
20. S. Mukharji21. Ranganath Misra
22. K.N. Singh
23. M. H. Kania
24. L. M. Sharma
25. M. N. Venkatachaliah
26. A. M. Ahmadi
27. J. S. Verma
28. M. M. Punchhi
29. A. S. Anand
30. S. P. Bharucha
31. B. N. Kirpal
32. G. B. Pattanaik
33. V. N. Khare
34. Rajendra Babu
35. R. C. Lahoti
36. Y. K. Sabharwal
37. K.G.Balakrishnan
12/31/2011 Supreme Court of India - Wikipedia, the
wikipedia.org//Supreme_Court_of_I 11/
7/31/2019 Detail About Supreme Court of India
12/15
See also
Attorney General of India
Solicitor General of India
References
1. ^ http://www.supremecourtofindia.nic.in/constitution.htm2. ^ Maha minister gets jail for contempt (http://www.ibnlive.com/news/maha-minister-gets-jail-for-contempt/10038-
4.html)
3. ^ "Maharashtra Minister gets one-month jail term"
(http://www.hindu.com/2006/05/11/stories/2006051116320100.htm) .News. Thursday, May 11, 2006.
http://www.hindu.com/2006/05/11/stories/2006051116320100.htm. Retrieved November 30, 2011.
4. ^ "Maha minister gets jail for contempt" (http://ibnlive.in.com/news/maha-minister-gets-jail-for-contempt/10038-
4.html) .News. Thursday, May 11, 2006. http://ibnlive.in.com/news/maha-minister-gets-jail-for-contempt/10038-
4.html. Retrieved November 30, 2011.
5. ^ [1] (http://openarchive.in/judis/2449.htm)
6. ^ Free Supreme Court Judgements (http://www.supremecourt.manupatra.com)
7. ^ab
V R Krishna Iyer (2000-06-27). "Emergency -- Darkest hour in India's judicial history"(http://www.indianexpress.com/res/web/pIe/ie/daily/20000627/ina27053.html) . The Indian Express.
http://www.indianexpress.com/res/web/pIe/ie/daily/20000627/ina27053.html. Retrieved 2007-09-16.
8. ^ ab Jos. Peter D 'Souza (June 2001). "A.D.M. Jabalpur vs Shukla: When the Supreme Court struck down the
Habeas Corpus" (http://www.pucl.org/reports/National/2001/habeascorpus.htm) . PUCL Bulletin.
http://www.pucl.org/reports/National/2001/habeascorpus.htm. Retrieved 2007-09-16.
9. ^ Anil B. Divan (15 March 2004). "Cry Freedom" (http://www.indianexpress.com/full_story.php?
content_id=42937) . The Indian Express. http://www.indianexpress.com/full_story.php?content_id=42937.
Retrieved 2007-09-16.
10. ^ Ramachandra Guha.India af ter Gandhi: The history of the world's largest democracy. Macmillan/Picador, 2007.
p. 500.
11. ^a
b
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/thrillers-in-the-supreme-court/749402/012. ^ http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2011-02-11/india/28541511_1_names-of-foreign-bank-lgt-bank-black-
money
13. ^ http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2011-01-26/news/28425995_1_black-money-liechtenstein-s-lgt-
bank-accounts-in-tax-havens
14. ^ Yogesh Kumar Sabharwal
15. ^ Ex-chief justice under corruption panel scanner (http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage/StoryPage.aspx?
id=3a1e5636-0e74-45da-a271-326c51d2fb23&&Headline=Ex-chief+justice+under+corruption+panel+scanner) ,
Hindustan Times, New Delhi, June 09,2008
16. ^ Judicial probe sought in Ghaziabad PF scam (http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage/StoryPage.aspx?
sectionName=&id=e88277f8-3e32-473d-b99c-
b17aa2e09e8a&MatchID1=4728&TeamID1=2&TeamID2=3&MatchType1=1&SeriesID1=1191&PrimaryID=4728, Hindustan Times, New Delhi, July 07,2008
17. ^ ab Black sheep could be in judiciary too, admits Supreme Court (http://www.nerve.in/news:253500154207) ,
Nerve News India
18. ^ ab Black sheep could be in judiciary too, admits Supreme Court (http://feeds.bignewsnetwork.com/index.php?
sid=391098) , 6 August 2008
19. ^ SC judge withdraws from Uttar Pradesh PF scam hearing
(http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Even_God_cannot_save_this_country_Supreme_Court_/rssarticleshow/3330091
, The Economic Times, 8 Aug, 2008
20. ^ PF scam: Apex court judge withdraws after charges (http://www.business-standard.com/india/storypage.php?
autono=330823) , Business Standard, 9 August 2008
12/31/2011 Supreme Court of India - Wikipedia, the
wikipedia.org//Supreme_Court_of_I 12/
7/31/2019 Detail About Supreme Court of India
13/15
21. ^ Apex court judge abandons graft case hearing against judiciary (http://in.news.yahoo.com/43/20080807/812/tnl-
apex-court-judge-abandons-graft-case.html) , Yahoo India News, 7 August 2008
22. ^ Apex court judge abandons graft case hearing against judiciary (http://www.nerve.in/news:253500154908) , 7
August 2008
23. ^ Sound and fury in SC: Judge pulls out of PF scam hearing
(http://www1.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/3339200.cms) , The Times of India, 8 Aug 2008
24. ^ Shameful first: CBI to question two HC Judges (http://ibnlive.in.com/news/shameful-first-cbi-to-question-two-
hc-judges/73211-3.html) , IBN Live, 9 September 2008
25. ^ In India, even God is helpless, says SC
(http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Even_God_cannot_save_this_country_Supreme_Court_/rssarticleshow/3330091
, The Times of India, 5 Aug 2008
26. ^ Even God can't save this country: SC (http://www.business-standard.com/general/storypage_general.php?
&autono=330593) , Business Standard, 9 August 2008
27. ^ Even God cannot save this country: Supreme Court! (http://www.inewsindia.com/2008/08/05/even-god-cannot-
save-this-country-supreme-court/) , I News India, 5 August 2008
28. ^ SC says even God will not be able to save this country (http://in.news.yahoo.com/139/20080805/808/tnl-sc-
says-even-god-will-not-be-able-to.html) , Yahoo India News, 5 August 2008
29. ^ Judicial Corruption Fuels Impunity, Corrodes Rule of Law (http://209.85.175.104/search?
q=cache:pWATOPh9wrwJ:tiindia.in/data/files/Press%2520Release%2520on%2520GCR%2520-
2007.pdf+transparency+international&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=in&client=firefox-a) , Transparency International,
Press Release, 24 May 200730. ^ Indolence in Indias Judiciary
(http://www.karmayog.org/anticorruption/upload/6733/GCR2007ChateronIndia.doc.http://209.85.175.104/search?
q=cache:SJgIPp91q08J:www.karmayog.org/anticorruption/upload/6733/GCR2007ChateronIndia.doc+indolence+in
a)
31. ^ Corrupt judges of India, e Voice Of Human Rights Watch e-news weekly
(http://groups.google.co.in/group/hrwepaper/web/corruption-police-judges-india) , 21 July 2007
32. ^ Judicial Accountability (http://indian-reflections.blogspot.com/2008_05_18_archive.html) , May 2008
33. ^ SC evasive on asset declaration by judges
(http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/SC_evasive_on_asset_declaration_by_judges/articleshow/2949631.cms) , The
Times of India, 14 April 2008
34. ^ CIC to decide if details of judges' assets covered under RTI(http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/India/CIC_to_decide_if_details_of_judges_assets_covered_under_RTI/articlesho
, The Times of India, 15 October 2008
35. ^ No rules for judges to declare assets: CIC (http://in.news.yahoo.com/32/20081016/1053/tnl-no-rules-for-judges-
to-declare-asset_1.html) , Yahoo India News, 16 October 2008
36. ^ Can`t reveal details of judges` assets under RTI: SC to CIC (http://www.zeenews.com/articles.asp?
aid=481263&sid=NAT) , Zee News. Com, 6 November 2008
37. ^ Judges wealth info cant be shared (http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage/StoryPage.aspx?
sectionName=&id=78e1bb25-881e-4042-9f3f-
42a7ceb85ae6&MatchID1=4816&TeamID1=6&TeamID2=1&MatchType1=1&SeriesID1=1212&PrimaryID=4816
, Hindustan Times, 6 November 2008
38. ^ Judges asset declaration before CJI not for public eye: SC to CIC (http://www.indianexpress.com/news/judges-asset-declaration-before-cji-not.../381980/) , Indian Express, 6 November 2008
39. ^ The case of judicial injustice (http://www.indianexpress.com/ie/daily/19990331/iex31074.html) , Indian Express,
31 March 1999
40. ^ The secret club of judges (http://www.indianexpress.com/ie/daily/20000423/ied20044.html) , Indian Express,
Sunday, 23 April 2000
41. ^ Not above the Law (http://www.rti.org.in/Documents/NewsLetters/RTI%20TIMES%20SEPTEMBER-2007.pdf)
, Times of India Editorial, 24 September 2007
42. ^ Political affiliations considered in appointment of judges (http://www.rtiindia.org/forum/1759-political-affiliations-
considered-appointment-judges.html) , RTI India.org, 23 October 2007
43. ^ Do India's judges have something to hide?
(http://www.upiasia.com/Politics/2008/05/13/do_indias_judges_have_something_to_hide/6108/) UPI Asia.com, 13
12/31/2011 Supreme Court of India - Wikipedia, the
wikipedia.org//Supreme_Court_of_I 13/
7/31/2019 Detail About Supreme Court of India
14/15
May 2008
44. ^ Should chief justice come under RTI? (http://www.ndtv.com/convergence/ndtv/story.aspx?
id=NEWEN20080047353&ch=4/19/2008%2011:20:00%20PM) , NDTV.com, 19 April 2008
45. ^ RTI Act does not apply to my office: CJI (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/2964678.cms) , The
Times of India, 20 April 2008
46. ^ Judiciary comes under RTI ambit (http://www.financialexpress.com/news/Judiciary-comes-under-RTI-ambit-
says-House-panel/303342/) , says House Panel, The Financial Express, 30 April 2008
47. ^ Judges accountability under RTI Act "debatable" says CJI (http://chennaionline.com/colnews/newsitem.asp?
NEWSID={F4ED3FE1-C0D7-4215-AE50-039D75C5B4F4}&CATEGORYNAME=natl) , Chennaionline, New
Delhi, 10 May 2008
48. ^ Is the CJI a public servant? (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/2969521.cms) , The Times of India,
22 April 2008
49. ^ I am a public servant: CJI (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/3013416.cms) , The Times of India, 6
May 2008
50. ^ ab Delayed justice leading to lynching mobs: Pratibha
(http://www1.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/2808523.cms) , The Times of India, 24 February 2008
51. ^ Manmohan Singh calls for check on corruption in judiciary (http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/world-
news/manmohan-singh-calls-for-check-on-corruption-in-the-judiciary_10039700.html) , Thaindian News, 19 April
2008
52. ^ Pass Judges (Inquiry) Bill in next session, panel tells Govt. (http://www.zeenews.com/articles.asp?
aid=473145&sid=NAT) , Zee News, India Edition, 30 September 2008
53. ^ Bill for probe panel against errant judges cleared (http://www.igovernment.in/site/Bill-for-probe-panel-against-
errant-judges-cleared/) , iGovernment, 10 October 2008
54. ^ Lawyer-judge showdown in Supreme Court (http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage/StoryPage.aspx?
sectionName=WorldSectionPage&id=d8a5f2f0-d33f-49a0-9b45-
0b1bcb9d08e7&MatchID1=4924&TeamID1=4&TeamID2=2&MatchType1=1&SeriesID1=1244&PrimaryID=4924
judge+showdown+in+Supreme+Court) , Hindustan Times, 7 August 2008
55. ^ UP cops want CBI probe against 34 judges
(http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/India/File_UP_cops_want_CBI_probe_against_34_judges/articleshow/3464634.c
, The Times of India, 10 September 2008
56. ^ UP cops want CBI probe against 34 judges
(http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/UP_cops_want_CBI_probe_against_34_judges/articleshow/3464634.cms) , 10September 2008, The Times of India
57. ^ Stemming rot: Judges dont need complete immunity, says CJI
(http://www.judicialreforms.org/files/stemming_rot_toi.pdf) , 10 September 2008, The Times of India
58. ^ ab Judiciary should encourage fair criticism: Pranab
(http://humanrightsindia.blogspot.com/2008_02_01_archive.html) , 25 February 2008
59. ^ Speaker expresses surprise over CJI's reported stand on hearing Teesta Setalvad
(http://www.hindu.com/2008/02/25/stories/2008022553781200.htm) , The Hindu, 25 February 2008
60. ^ Supreme Court judges ready to declare assets, but with riders
(http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/News/Supreme-Court-judges-ready-to-declare-assets-but-with-
riders/rssarticleshow/4278163.cms) - Politics/Nation-News - The Economic Times
61. ^ Supreme Court judges ready to declare assets, but with riders (http://news.in.msn.com/national/article.aspx?cp-documentid=2061219) - National News MSN India - News
62. ^ Supreme Court judges ready to declare assets, but with riders (http://www.newkerala.com/nkfullnews-1-
5007.html) , NewKerala - India 's Top Online Newspaper
63. ^ Judiciary should encourage constructive criticism (http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/politics /judiciary-
should-encourage-constructive-criticism-mukherjee_10020775.html) , Thaindian News, 24 February 2008
64. ^ "Chief Justice of India and sitting Judges (http://www.supremecourtofindia.nic.in/new_s/judge.htm) ." Supreme
Court of India. Accessed 3 November 2008.
External links
12/31/2011 Supreme Court of India - Wikipedia, the
wikipedia.org//Supreme_Court_of_I 14/
7/31/2019 Detail About Supreme Court of India
15/15
Official website (http://supremecourtofindia.nic.in/)
Text of all Indian Supreme Court judgments on CommonLII (http://www.commonlii.org/in/cases/INSC/)
Joginder Kumar Vs State Of Up, 1994, Habeas Corpus
(http://ipc498a.wordpress.com/2007/09/23/magna-carta-and-joginder-kumar-vs-state-of-up/)
Basic Structure of Constitution
(http://www.humanrightsinitiative.org/publications/const/the_basic_structure_of_the_indian_constitution.pdf
Latest Supreme Court judgments (http://www.scjudgments.com/)
Latest Judgments of Supreme Court and All the High Courts of India (http://lawmirror.com/)
Judgments of the Supreme Court of India (http://vlex.com/source/1972/)
OpenJudis - Free Database of Supreme Court cases from 1950 (http://judis.openarchive.in/)
India Law Articles (http://vlex.com/source/1878/)
Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation / Case Law (http://www.rishabhdara.com/)
Discussion on finality of Supreme Court of India judgements on HindustanTimes
(http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/181_1780397,000600010001.htm)
Justice B.N. Srikrishna, "Skinning a Cat", (2005) 8 SCC (Jour) 3, available at http://www.ebc-
india.com/lawyer/articles/2005_8_3.htm (a critique of judicial activism in India).
Satellite picture by Google Maps (http://maps.google.com/maps?
ll=28.622237,77.239584&q=28.622237,77.239584&spn=0.002208,0.00537&t=h)/ Environmental Cases in Supreme Court (http://www.forestcaseindia.org)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Supreme_Court_of_India&oldid=466562103"
Categories: Supreme Court of India National supreme courts
This page was last modified on 18 December 2011 at 18:54.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply.
See Terms of use for details.
Wikipedia is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
12/31/2011 Supreme Court of India - Wikipedia, the