Supreme Court of India

Edited By Ritika Jonwal | Updated on Jul 02, 2025 05:47 PM IST

The Constitution provides for the judiciary as a separate organ. The Constitution emphasizes on separation of power between the judiciary and legislature. An independent judicial system is vital to protecting the values of the Constitution. Whenever there exists a question on the interpretation of the Constitution, the Judiciary must interpret the Constitution. The Supreme Court of India is the final adjudicating authority in case of a dispute between the centre and the states or between two states. It is also the highest appellate authority for civil and criminal matters.

This Story also Contains

What is the Supreme Court of India?
Evolution of the Supreme Court
Constitutional Provisions Related to the Supreme Court of India
Composition of Supreme Court
Supreme Court Judge Qualification
Appointment of Supreme Court’s Judge of India
Tenure and Resignation of Supreme Court Judges
Salaries and Allowances of Supreme Court Judges
The Powers of Supreme Court and jurisdictions of Supreme Courts
Landmark Cases of Supreme Court of India
The Current process for appointment of Supreme Court Judges
Conclusion

Supreme Court of India

What is the Supreme Court of India?

The Supreme Court of India is referred to as one of the most powerful courts in the world. Unlike the courts in other jurisdictions, the Supreme Court of India is mighty in the sense that the judges of the Supreme Court have the power to appoint new judges to the Supreme Court without any hindrance from the executive and the Government. This necessarily helps to keep the judiciary independent and functioning without any fear.

Evolution of the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court of Judicature in Calcutta was formed as a Court of Record, complete with full jurisdiction and authority, with the enactment of the Regulating Act of 1773.
It was set up to consider, hear, and rule on any criminal complaints as well as to hear, consider, and rule on any lawsuits or other legal proceedings in Bengal, Bihar, and Orissa.
King George III founded the Supreme Courts at Madras and Bombay in 1800 and 1823, respectively.
The Supreme Courts in Calcutta, Madras, and Bombay, as well as the Sadar Adalats in Presidency cities, were dissolved by the India High Courts Act of 1861, which also established High Courts for many provinces.
Prior to the Federal Court of India's establishment under the Government of India Act 1935, these High Courts held the unique distinction of being the highest courts in all matters.
The Federal Court had the authority to hear appeals against decisions made by High Courts and resolve conflicts arising between federal states and provinces.
The Indian Constitution was ratified on January 26, 1950, following India's independence in 1947. Additionally, the Supreme Court of India was established, holding its inaugural session on January 28, 1950.
Every court on Indian soil must abide by the ruling made by the Supreme Court.
It can overturn legislative and executive actions that are against the basic rights protected by the Constitution, the Union-States power balance, or the contents and scheme of the Constitution. This is known as judicial review authority.

Constitutional Provisions Related to the Supreme Court of India

The Supreme Court is established under the Indian Constitution in Part V (The Union) and Chapter 6 (The Union Judiciary).
Part V of the Constitution covers the structure, autonomy, authority, and processes of the Supreme Court in Articles 124 through 147.
According to Article 124(1) of the Indian constitution, there will be a Supreme Court of India made up of the Chief Justice of India (CJI) and no more than seven additional judges unless Parliament passes a statute specifying a higher number.
The jurisdiction of Supreme Court of India may be roughly divided into three categories: advisory, appellate, and original jurisdiction. Nonetheless, the Supreme Court possesses additional authority.

Composition of Supreme Court

Thirty-one justices, including one chief justice, make up the Supreme Court at the moment.
The 2019 Supreme Court (Judges) Bill has strengthened the court with the addition of four judges. The number of judges rose from 31 to 34, which included the CJI.
The Supreme Court was originally intended to include eight justices—one chief justice and seven additional judges.
They can be regulated by the Parliament.

Supreme Court Judge Qualification

Qualifications of a Supreme Court Judge are enumerated below:

A person who has five years of experience as a judge in the High Court, though it is not necessary to have this five years of experience in a single High Court. For example, a person may practice in Allahabad High Court for two years and 3 years in Delhi High Court,
He/she must have 10 years of experience as an advocate in the High Court,
In the President’s opinion, a distinguished Jurist with a profound understanding of the law.

However, there has never been an appointment through the last criteria. Most of the appointed judges are people with experience as judges of a High Court. There have been fewer people who were appointed as judges based on their 10 years of experience as an advocate.

Appointment of Supreme Court’s Judge of India

The process of appointment of Supreme Court judges has gone through numerous changes by way of constitutional amendments and the rulings of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India. Based on this, the process of appointment can be segregated into the following

The procedure of appointment of Supreme Court judge before the 99th amendment;
The procedure of appointment of Supreme Court judge after the 99th amendment;
Current procedure of appointment of Supreme Court judge.

Before the passing 99th constitutional amendment, amending article 124(2) governing the appointment of Supreme Court judges stated that “every judge of the Supreme Court shall be appointed by the president by warrant under his hand and seal after consultation with such of judges of the Supreme Court and High Court in the states as the President may deem necessary for the purpose.”

Provided that in the case of appointment of a judge other than the Chief Justice, the Chief Justice of India shall be consulted. This means that before appointing a Judge to the Supreme Court of India, the President was bound to consult with the Chief of India. However, the President didn't need to consult with the outgoing Chief Justice in case of appointment of a new Chief Justice.
It was a norm to appoint a senior Judge of the Supreme Court as the Chief Justice till 1973. This practice became an accepted convention which was followed by the President as well. This practice was discontinued when the Government appointed Justice A. N. Roy as the Chief Justice of India superseding three other senior judges of the Supreme Court. Owing to this there was a lot of debate around the appointment of judges to the Supreme Court and cases being filed before the Supreme Court.

With the passing of the 99th Constitutional Amendment amending Article 124(2) of the Constitution, it was introduced that every Judge of the Apex Court will be appointed by the President by warrant under his hand and seal on the recommendation of the National Judicial Appointment Commission (NJAC) which was referred to as Article 124A

The composition of NJAC consisted of both judicial and executive representatives.

Composition of NJAC
Executive Representative	Judicial Representative
Union Law Minister	CJI
Two Eminent persons	Two other Senior Judges

However, the Supreme Court while dealing with the case of Supreme Court Advocates on Record Association vs Union Of India, declared the 99th Constitutional amendment as “unconstitutional and void.” In the opinion of the court, NJAC altered the basic structure of the Constitution as it goes against the separation of powers. This led to the revival of the Collegium system for the appointment of Judges.

99th Constitutional Amendment

2014 saw the establishment of the National Judicial Commission Act (NJAC) under the 99th Constitutional Amendment Act. The National Judicial Appointments Commission is being established by the Constitutional 121st Amendment Bill, 2014, which has been introduced concurrently with the Bill (NJAC).
In addition to listing the procedures that the NJAC must adhere to, the Bill also specifies how applicants must be recommended for appointment as Chief Justice of India and other Supreme Court judges, as well as Chief Justice and other justices of secondary courts.
Only judges can nominate and remove judges in India under a system called the "Collegium." "Judges selecting Judges" is another name for this method. The system was implemented to strengthen and improve the scheduling procedure.
The name "Collegium" is not included in the Constitution; rather, it was coined by the court to preserve its independent power to select justices.
The 99th Constitutional Amendment is responsible for the establishment of the National Judicial Commission. By the passage of this amendment, the collegium method of appointing judges was replaced by the National Judicial Appointment Commission (NJAC).
However, the Supreme Court upheld the collegium system, holding that the NJAC went against the fundamental structural principle and the independence of the court.

Tenure and Resignation of Supreme Court Judges

The tenure of a Supreme Court judge is not set by the Constitution. In this regard, it does, however, make the following three provisions:

He will remain in office until he turns 65. Any inquiry about his age will be decided by the authorities and according to the procedure prescribed by Parliament.
He can submit a resignation letter to the President.
The President has the authority to remove him from office at the Parliament's proposal.

How are judges removed from office?

The President may, by executive order, remove a justice from the Supreme Court. Only after receiving a presentation from Parliament in the same session about the removal, may the President issue an order for its removal.
A special majority of each House of Parliament, that is, a majority of the members present and voting in that House as well as a majority of the House's overall membership, must approve the address. There are two reasons for removal: incompetence or demonstrated misbehaviour.
The process of impeaching a Supreme Court judge and removing them from office is governed by the Judges Enquiry Act of 1968.
Thus yet, no Supreme Court justice has been impeached. The Parliament rejected the impeachment motions of Justices Dipak Misra (2017–18) and V Ramaswami (1991–1993).

Removal of Supreme Court Judges of India

The process of removal of Supreme Court judges is known as impeachment. The word impeachment has no direct reference in the Constitution. However, article 124 provides for the removal of Judges of the Supreme Court in certain cases. The elaborate process of impeachment can be found in the Judges Inquiry Act 1968. The process of removal is as follows:
1. An impeachment motion is present in either house of Parliament. To initiate a motion of impeachment, at least 100 members of the Lok Sabha and 50 members of the Rajya Sabha must sign the motion before the notice is given to the speaker. The speaker will examine the allegations.

2. on the admission of the motion, the Speaker will form a committee consisting of the Chief Justice, other Judges, and an eminent jurist.

3. After receiving a report on the completion of the investigation. A motion for removal will be instituted and debated.

4. both houses of the Parliament have to adopt the motion.

5. Once the motion is adopted, it is sent to the President, who will issue an order for removal of the Judge.

Till now, no Judge has been impeached by the President.

Salaries and Allowances of Supreme Court Judges

Under Article 125 of the Constitution, the Supreme Court justices shall receive the remuneration listed in the Second Schedule.
Parliament regularly sets the Supreme Court judges' salaries, benefits, leave policies, and pensions. They cannot be reverted to their disadvantage after appointment unless there is a financial reason.
2018 saw an increase in the Chief Justice of India's pay from 1 lakh to 2.80 lakh per month and in judges' compensation from 90,000 to 2.50 lakh per month.
Together with free housing, they receive a sumptuary stipend (which is paid to different ranks of staff in the Central Government to cover the cost of entertaining guests) and other advantages including health insurance, a car, and a phone.
A pension equal to half of their final salary is due each month to chief justices and judges who have retired.

The Powers of Supreme Court and jurisdictions of Supreme Courts

Jurisdiction refers to the extent of the Supreme Court's authority to hear cases and provide decisions. Original, appellate, and advisory are the three categories of jurisdiction that make up the Supreme Court.

Original jurisdiction

Some instances come under the Supreme Court's exclusive purview. It implies that the Supreme Court is the exclusive venue for the start or genesis of all such matters. It further implies that these cases cannot be filed in any other court. Below is a list of instances or conflicts that fall under the original jurisdiction:

Conflicts involving one or more States and the Indian government.
Disagreements exist between the Indian government and one or more states, as well as between those states and one another.
Conflicts involving two or more States.

However, the following circumstances prevent its authority from extending:

Any disagreement resulting from a pre-Constitutional treaty, covenant, engagement, sanad, or other like document.
Any disagreement resulting from a treaty, agreement, etc. that expressly states that the aforementioned jurisdiction does not apply to such a disagreement.
Water issues between states.
Subjects referred to the Commission on Finance.
Adjustment of specific costs and pensions between the states and the federal government.
Regular commercial disputes involving the states and the centre.
A state suing the Centre to recover damages.

Writ Jurisdiction

The SC has the authority to impose directives, orders, or writs, including prohibition, quo warranto, habeas corpus, and certiorari writs.
The person who feels wronged might go straight to the SC rather than through an appeal
But the constitution also gives the HC the authority to make written orders, therefore this jurisdiction is not limited to the SC.
Furthermore, the SC has less writ jurisdiction than the HC because the former can issue writs for the enforcement of legal rights while the latter can only do so in cases where a person's basic rights have been infringed.

Appellate jurisdiction

It seems like an appeal against a lower court's decision. It is blessed with broad appellate authority.
The Supreme Court is the highest Court of Appeal among all courts.

Its appellate jurisdiction can be separated into:

Cases concerning constitutional interpretation, whether they be criminal, civil, or both; civil cases regardless of whether they raise constitutional issues; and criminal cases regardless of whether they raise constitutional issues

Advisory jurisdiction

The President may request the Supreme Court's opinion in the following two kinds of cases, as permitted under Article 143 of the Constitution:

Regarding any legal issue or significant public truth that has emerged or is anticipated to emerge.
Regarding any disagreement that stems from a pre-constitutional treaty, covenant, engagement, sanad, or other such documents.

The court is required to guide the second subject, but it may decline to do so in the first. Should the President receive counsel or an opinion from the Court, he has the option to accept or reject it. The President is not required to heed the Court's advice. Thus far, the President has consistently followed the Court's recommendation.

Power of Judicial Review

When someone challenges a legislative or executive branch act or order, the judiciary has the authority to evaluate it and decide about its constitutionality. This process is known as judicial review.
Articles 13, 32, 136, 142, and 147 of the Indian Constitution grant the Court Judicial Review authority.
India has an autonomous judiciary possessing broad authority over legislative and executive actions.
The theory that allows the judiciary to examine executive and legislative activities is known as judicial review. It is widely regarded as the fundamental framework of an independent judiciary (Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain case).
On the other hand, there are three types of judicial review: legislative action reviews, judicial decision reviews, and administrative action reviews.
Thus, courts also must safeguard the proper distribution of power, as well as defend fundamental rights, human rights, and people's rights to life and liberty.
Courts possess broad authority over cases, but they must use this authority very carefully and responsibly.
These abilities are limited in the following ways: they can only be used to determine if the choice was made correctly in the first place; the decision itself is not allowed.
It is exclusively assigned to our higher courts, the Supreme Court and the high court. cannot intervene in political or policy issues unless it is required.

Power of Judicial Activism

It may be characterised as a way of thinking about judicial decision-making in which judges give weight to their individual opinions about public policy rather than constitutionalism.
Maintains Constitutional Morality: The Naz Foundation Case, which used the idea of constitutional morality to overturn Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code and decriminalise homosexuality, is a significant case that creatively applied this notion.
In contrast to widely held religious views, Justice Chandrachud decided in the Sabarimala judgement that women should be permitted admission into the Sabarimala shrine.
In 2017, Triple Talaq was outlawed due to its extreme violation of the fundamental rights of Muslim women. If this law had originated in the executive branch or through the legislative branch, it would never have been approved. For example, Article 21 made the right to privacy a fundamental right.
According to a People's Survey of India study, 80% of Indians believe the Supreme Court to be trustworthy. Even though it is not an elected body, maintaining the rule of law depends on the Supreme Court. For example, until Parliament passed legislation on the matter, the Whistle Blowers Act protected citizens against dishonest authorities and politicians under Article 142.

Landmark Cases of Supreme Court of India

S.P. Gupta vs Union of India

In the case of S.P. Gupta vs Union of India, also referred to as the first Judges Case. The apex court ruled that ‘consultation’ merely means “mere consultation of views” and that the President of India was not bound by the consultation. It gave the President the power to ignore the advice of the Chief Justice. This decision of the Supreme Court vested the power of appointment of Judges solely and exclusively in the Central Government, and the role of Chief Justice was merely consultative. Therefore, this case gave the upper hand to the executive in the appointment of Judges.

Supreme Court Advocates on Record Association vs UOI

Subsequently, the Supreme Court, while dealing with Supreme Court Advocates on Record Association vs UOI, also referred to as the Second Judges Transfer case, overruled its earlier judgment in S.P. Gupta vs Union of India by a majority of 7:2. It gave the primacy to Chief Justice of India in case of appointment of Judges to the Supreme and High Court. The court opined that the appointment of Chief Justice shall exclusively be based on seniority. It ensured that there does not exist any political favour in case of appointment of Judges. This case also led to the formation of the Collegium System.

Third Judges Case

After this, the Supreme Court dealt with the Third Judges case, which was technically not a case but a presidential reference under Article 143 of the Constitution. The President sought clarification on the Collegium System. The Supreme Court clarified that the Chief Justice ought to make recommendations only after consultation with four senior judges. This recommendation should necessarily be in writing. It also gave the discretion to the President to send back the recommendation, but on a recommendation of the same names by the collegium, the President is bound to accept the recommendation.

The Current process for appointment of Supreme Court Judges

While dealing with the case of Supreme Court Advocates on Record Association vs Union of India, the Court revived the Collegium system existing before the 99th Constitutional amendment. However, the Court took a step forward to reform the old collegium system, which led to the enactment of the memorandum of procedure, which regulated the functioning of the Collegium system. Salient features of MOP are as follows:

The MOP may indicate basic eligibility criteria for the appointment of judges, such as the minimum age.
It also brings transparency to the process of appointment, it mandates that the MOP for appointment is uploaded on the website.
It also provides for the establishment of the secretariat for better management of the collegium system.

Why is the Supreme Court's independence important?

Granville Austin claims that the Constituent Assembly deliberated extensively on the subject of the court's independence as well as two other related matters: the Supreme Court's authority and the extent of judicial reviews.

It serves as the Constitution's last arbiter and protector.
The people's fundamental rights are protected by the Supreme Court.
It also serves as the nation's supreme and last arbiter of interpretation for general law.
In both civil and criminal cases, it is the highest court of appeals.
An unbiased, independent body must resolve disputes between the federal government and the states to uphold the supremacy of the Constitution.
The judiciary as an institution has to be free from political interference and pressure to continue being powerful.

Conclusion

The process of appointment of judges needs to be devoid of any kind of hindrance from the executive so that it does not lead to political favouritism in the appointment of judges. Therefore, the Collegium system was developed. Before the advent of the collegium system, the senior judge was appointed as the Chief Justice. However, this was not mandatory, and the President made certain appointments contrary to the same as well.

Time and again, questions have also been raised about the functioning of the collegium system. Therefore, the enactment of MOP is also a welcomed step. However, the issues of nepotism and lack of diversity are still raised against the appointment of Judges and this calls for a further reform in the Collegium system.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

1. Can we directly become Supreme Court judges?

Any individual who the President deems to be a prominent jurist may be personally appointed as a Supreme Court judge under Article 124(3).

2. How are SC judges appointed?

The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court is consulted before the President of India appoints any justice to the court.

3. What is the salary of a Supreme Court judge?

With a salary of INR 30 LPA, the Chief Justice of India is the highest-paid judge in the nation.

4. Which of the following describes a Supreme Court judge's qualifications under Article 124?

According to Article 124(3), an individual seeking appointment as a judge of the Supreme Court must have the following requirements: ought to be an Indian citizen. At least five years of experience as a judge of a High Court or successive High courts, is required.

5. What are the qualifications of a Supreme Judge?

Qualifications for Appointment as Judge: As per Article 124(3) of the Constitution, an individual may be designated as a judge of the Supreme Court provided that they meet the following requirements: They must be an Indian citizen. must have presided over two consecutive High Courts as a judge for a minimum of five years.

6. How does the Supreme Court's advisory jurisdiction function?

Under Article 143 of the Constitution, the President can seek the Supreme Court's opinion on important questions of law or fact. While these opinions are not binding, they carry significant weight and help in resolving complex legal issues. This jurisdiction allows the Court to provide guidance on constitutional matters without the need for an actual dispute.

7. What is the role of the Supreme Court in resolving federal disputes?

The Supreme Court has exclusive original jurisdiction over disputes between states or between states and the central government. It acts as an impartial arbiter in these federal disputes, interpreting constitutional provisions related to the distribution of powers and resources. This role is crucial in maintaining the federal structure of India and resolving inter-state conflicts.

8. What is the role of the Supreme Court in overseeing the functioning of lower courts?

The Supreme Court has supervisory jurisdiction over all courts in India. It can issue directions to ensure proper administration of justice, transfer judges, and set standards for judicial conduct. The Court also reviews judgments of lower courts through its appellate jurisdiction, ensuring consistency in legal interpretations across the judicial system.

9. What is the role of the Supreme Court in protecting minority rights?

The Supreme Court plays a crucial role in protecting minority rights by interpreting constitutional provisions, striking down discriminatory laws, and issuing guidelines for minority protection. It has upheld principles of secularism, equality, and non-discrimination, often intervening to safeguard the rights of religious, linguistic, and cultural minorities.

10. How does the Supreme Court interpret fundamental rights in light of changing social norms?

The Supreme Court adopts a dynamic approach to interpreting fundamental rights, considering evolving social norms and values. It often uses the "living tree" doctrine, viewing the Constitution as a living document that must adapt to contemporary realities. This approach has led to progressive judgments on issues like privacy, gender equality, and LGBTQ+ rights.

11. What is the concept of "constitutional morality" as developed by the Supreme Court?

Constitutional morality, as articulated by the Supreme Court, refers to adherence to the core principles of the Constitution, such as equality, liberty, and fraternity. The Court has used this concept to interpret laws and executive actions, often striking down those that violate these fundamental constitutional values, even if they may have popular support.

12. How does the Supreme Court contribute to the development of human rights jurisprudence in India?

The Supreme Court has significantly contributed to human rights jurisprudence through expansive interpretation of fundamental rights, especially the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21. It has recognized various unenumerated rights as part of Article 21, including the right to privacy, right to clean environment, and right to education. The Court's judgments often draw from international human rights standards, integrating them into domestic law.

13. What is the significance of the Supreme Court's role in interpreting socio-economic rights?

The Supreme Court has played a crucial role in interpreting and enforcing socio-economic rights, often reading them into the fundamental right to life under Article 21. It has issued directives on issues like the right to food, education, and healthcare. While these rights are primarily in the Directive Principles of State Policy, the Court's interpretations have made many of them justiciable.

14. How does the Supreme Court contribute to the development of environmental law in India?

The Supreme Court has been at the forefront of developing environmental law in India. It has interpreted the right to a clean environment as part of the right to life, applied the 'polluter pays' principle, and emphasized sustainable development. The Court's judgments have led to the formulation of various environmental protection laws and policies, significantly shaping India's environmental jurisprudence.

15. How does the Supreme Court contribute to the development of labor laws and workers' rights?

The Supreme Court has significantly contributed to the development of labor laws by interpreting constitutional provisions and statutes to protect workers' rights. It has addressed issues like minimum wages, workplace safety, and social security. The Court's judgments often expand the scope of workers' rights, balancing the interests of employees with economic considerations.

16. What is the significance of Public Interest Litigation (PIL) in the Indian judicial system?

Public Interest Litigation (PIL) allows any individual or organization to approach the Supreme Court directly on matters of public interest, even if they are not personally affected. This has expanded access to justice, enabling the court to address social issues, protect fundamental rights, and hold the government accountable. PILs have played a crucial role in environmental protection, human rights, and social justice cases.

17. What is the concept of "basic structure doctrine" in Indian constitutional law?

The basic structure doctrine, established by the Supreme Court in the Kesavananda Bharati case (1973), holds that certain fundamental features of the Constitution cannot be altered or destroyed by constitutional amendments. This doctrine limits Parliament's power to amend the Constitution, preserving its core principles such as democracy, federalism, secularism, and the rule of law.

18. How does the Supreme Court contribute to the development of law in India?

The Supreme Court contributes to legal development through its judgments, which often interpret laws, clarify legal principles, and set precedents. These judgments become binding on all lower courts and guide future legal decisions. The Court also issues guidelines on various issues, filling legislative gaps and addressing emerging social and legal challenges.

19. How does the concept of judicial activism relate to the Supreme Court's functions?

Judicial activism refers to the Court's proactive approach in addressing social issues, protecting rights, and filling legislative gaps through its judgments. While it allows the Court to respond to pressing societal needs, it has also raised debates about the separation of powers and the extent of judicial intervention in policy matters. The Supreme Court has used judicial activism to drive social reforms and ensure government accountability.

20. How does the Supreme Court balance individual rights with national security concerns?

The Supreme Court often faces the challenge of balancing individual rights with national security interests. It examines each case on its merits, considering factors such as the nature of the threat, the extent of rights infringement, and the proportionality of government actions. The Court strives to protect fundamental rights while recognizing legitimate security concerns, often setting guidelines for government agencies to follow.

21. How does the Supreme Court address issues of gender justice and equality?

The Supreme Court has been proactive in addressing gender justice issues through its judgments and guidelines. It has interpreted the right to equality expansively, striking down discriminatory laws and practices. The Court has issued landmark judgments on issues like sexual harassment at workplace, property rights for women, and gender discrimination in personal laws, contributing significantly to the advancement of gender equality in India.

22. How are Supreme Court judges appointed?

Supreme Court judges are appointed by the President of India in consultation with the Collegium, which consists of the Chief Justice of India and four senior-most judges of the Supreme Court. The Collegium recommends candidates, and the President typically follows their advice. This process aims to ensure judicial independence and minimize political influence in appointments.

23. How does the Supreme Court balance judicial independence with accountability?

The Supreme Court maintains judicial independence through secure tenure for judges, financial autonomy, and immunity from external pressures. At the same time, it ensures accountability through reasoned judgments, the collegium system for appointments, and internal mechanisms for addressing misconduct. The Court also subjects itself to public scrutiny and criticism, maintaining a delicate balance between independence and accountability.

24. How does the Supreme Court ensure transparency and accountability in its functioning?

The Supreme Court has taken steps to enhance transparency, such as publishing judgments online, allowing live streaming of certain proceedings, and implementing the Right to Information Act. It also follows the principle of open courts, where proceedings are generally open to the public. The Court's reasoned judgments and the scrutiny of its decisions by legal experts and media contribute to its accountability.

25. How does the Supreme Court address the issue of judicial delays and backlog of cases?

The Supreme Court has taken various measures to address judicial delays, including streamlining procedures, encouraging alternative dispute resolution mechanisms, and using technology for case management. It also issues guidelines to lower courts for speedy trials and has advocated for increasing the number of judges and improving judicial infrastructure.

26. What is the primary role of the Supreme Court of India?

The Supreme Court of India is the highest judicial authority in the country. Its primary role is to interpret and uphold the Constitution, settle disputes between states and the central government, and hear appeals from lower courts. It also has the power of judicial review, allowing it to examine the constitutionality of laws and executive actions.

27. How does the Supreme Court's power of judicial review impact the Indian democratic system?

The power of judicial review allows the Supreme Court to examine and strike down laws or executive actions that violate the Constitution. This serves as a crucial check on the legislative and executive branches, ensuring they operate within constitutional limits. It helps maintain the balance of power and protects citizens' fundamental rights, reinforcing India's democratic foundations.

28. What is the difference between the Supreme Court's original and appellate jurisdiction?

Original jurisdiction refers to cases that can be directly filed in the Supreme Court, such as disputes between states or between states and the central government. Appellate jurisdiction involves hearing appeals from lower courts' decisions. While original jurisdiction is limited to specific types of cases, appellate jurisdiction covers a wide range of civil, criminal, and constitutional matters.

29. How does the Supreme Court ensure the enforcement of fundamental rights?

The Supreme Court can issue writs (such as habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, certiorari, and quo warranto) to enforce fundamental rights. These are powerful judicial orders that can compel government authorities to act or refrain from certain actions. The Court can also declare laws unconstitutional if they violate fundamental rights, providing a strong mechanism for rights protection.

30. What is the role of the Supreme Court in interpreting the Constitution?

As the final interpreter of the Constitution, the Supreme Court plays a crucial role in clarifying constitutional provisions, resolving ambiguities, and adapting the Constitution to changing social and political contexts. Its interpretations become part of constitutional law, guiding lower courts, government bodies, and citizens in understanding and applying constitutional principles.

31. What is the role of the Supreme Court in maintaining the federal structure of India?

The Supreme Court plays a crucial role in maintaining India's federal structure by adjudicating disputes between states and the central government, interpreting constitutional provisions related to the distribution of powers, and ensuring that both central and state governments operate within their constitutional limits. Its judgments help in balancing national unity with regional autonomy.

32. What is the significance of the Supreme Court's power to transfer cases?

The Supreme Court can transfer cases from one High Court to another or from one lower court to another in different states. This power is used to ensure fair trials, prevent potential bias, or address situations where a case might be better handled in a different jurisdiction. It helps maintain the integrity of the judicial process and public confidence in the courts.

33. What is the significance of the Supreme Court's power to review its own judgments?

The Supreme Court has the power to review and correct its own judgments through review petitions. This allows the Court to rectify errors, consider new evidence, or address substantial questions of law that may have been overlooked. It ensures that justice is not denied due to judicial errors and maintains the Court's credibility.

34. How does the Supreme Court contribute to environmental protection in India?

The Supreme Court has played a significant role in environmental protection through various judgments and directives. It has interpreted the right to a clean environment as part of the fundamental right to life, issued guidelines on pollution control, forest conservation, and sustainable development. The Court's proactive approach has led to the development of environmental jurisprudence in India.

35. What is the significance of the Supreme Court's power to punish for contempt?

The power to punish for contempt allows the Supreme Court to maintain its authority and ensure compliance with its orders. This power is used to address actions that obstruct the administration of justice or lower the Court's dignity. While it's a necessary tool for judicial functioning, its use is balanced against the right to free speech and fair criticism.

36. What is the significance of the Supreme Court's role in interpreting international treaties and conventions?

The Supreme Court plays a crucial role in interpreting international treaties and conventions in the Indian context. It often refers to international law principles while deciding cases, especially in areas like human rights and environmental protection. The Court's interpretations help in harmonizing domestic laws with international obligations and in applying global standards in the Indian legal system.

37. What is the role of the Supreme Court in electoral reforms?

The Supreme Court has played a significant role in electoral reforms by issuing guidelines on various aspects of the electoral process. It has mandated disclosure of criminal antecedents by candidates, regulated campaign financing, and emphasized the right to know about candidates. The Court's interventions aim to enhance transparency, reduce corruption, and strengthen democratic processes in elections.

38. How does the Supreme Court balance religious freedom with other constitutional rights?

The Supreme Court often faces the challenge of balancing religious freedom with other constitutional rights and principles. It interprets Article 25 (freedom of religion) in light of other fundamental rights and the principle of secularism. The Court has held that religious practices that are essential and integral to a religion are protected, but those that conflict with public order, morality, or other fundamental rights can be regulated or prohibited.

39. What is the significance of the Supreme Court's power to issue 'continuing mandamus'?

Continuing mandamus is a judicial innovation where the Supreme Court issues ongoing directions in a case and retains jurisdiction to monitor their implementation. This tool is particularly useful in public interest cases involving complex social issues or systemic violations. It allows the Court to ensure compliance with its orders over time and address evolving situations effectively.

40. How does the Supreme Court address the issue of custodial violence and police excesses?

The Supreme Court has been proactive in addressing custodial violence and police excesses. It has issued guidelines for arrest procedures, mandated installation of CCTV cameras in police stations, and emphasized the need for police reforms. The Court has also interpreted Article 21 to include the right to dignity and fair treatment in custody, holding authorities accountable for violations.

41. How does the Supreme Court balance individual privacy rights with state surveillance needs?

The Supreme Court has recognized the right to privacy as a fundamental right and has set guidelines for balancing it against state surveillance needs. It emphasizes the principles of proportionality, legality, and necessity in surveillance activities. The Court's judgments provide a framework for assessing the validity of surveillance measures, ensuring they do not unduly infringe on individual privacy.

42. What is the role of the Supreme Court in interpreting laws related to personal liberty and preventive detention?

The Supreme Court has been vigilant in protecting personal liberty while interpreting laws related to preventive detention. It has emphasized that preventive detention should be used sparingly and only when absolutely necessary. The Court scrutinizes such cases closely, ensuring that procedural safeguards are followed and that detentions are not arbitrary or excessive.

43. How does the Supreme Court address issues of corporate accountability and regulation?

The Supreme Court has played an important role in corporate regulation and accountability. It has interpreted laws to hold corporations responsible for environmental damage, labor rights violations, and consumer protection. The Court has also issued guidelines on corporate governance and emphasized the need for businesses to operate within ethical and legal frameworks.

44. What is the significance of the Supreme Court's role in interpreting laws related to technology and digital rights?

As technology evolves, the Supreme Court has been called upon to interpret laws in the context of digital rights, data protection, and cyber security. It has addressed issues like online privacy, data localization, and the regulation of social media platforms. The Court's judgments in this area help in adapting legal principles to the digital age and protecting citizens' rights in the online space.

45. What is the role of the Supreme Court in interpreting laws related to intellectual property rights?

The Supreme Court plays a crucial role in interpreting and shaping intellectual property laws in India. It balances the rights of creators and inventors with public interest, often addressing complex issues in patent, copyright, and trademark laws. The Court's judgments in this area have significant implications for innovation, access to knowledge, and international trade relations.

46. How does the Supreme Court address issues of caste-based discrimination and affirmative action?

The Supreme Court has been instrumental in addressing caste-based discrimination and interpreting laws related to affirmative action. It has upheld the constitutional validity of reservations while setting guidelines for their implementation. The Court's judgments often balance the need for social justice with the principle of merit, shaping policies on reservations in education and employment.

47. What is the significance of the Supreme Court's role in interpreting laws related to terrorism and national security?

The Supreme Court plays a crucial role in balancing national security concerns with individual rights when interpreting anti-terrorism laws. It scrutinizes the constitutionality of such laws, ensures they don't infringe unduly on fundamental rights, and sets guidelines for their application. The Court's judgments in this area aim to maintain a balance between effective counter-terrorism measures and the protection of civil liberties.

48. What is the role of the Supreme Court in interpreting laws related to child rights and juvenile justice?

The Supreme Court has been proactive in protecting child rights and shaping juvenile justice laws. It has interpreted laws to prioritize the best interests of the child, issued guidelines on child labor, education, and protection from abuse. The Court's judgments in this area have led to significant reforms in child welfare policies and the juvenile justice system.

49. How does the Supreme Court address issues of press freedom and media regulation?

The Supreme Court plays a crucial role in protecting press freedom while also addressing issues of media responsibility. It has interpreted the freedom of speech