Indian Judiciary System Essay

In a political system based on constitutional organization , the functions of rule making, rule enforcement and rule interpretation are separated into the trine institutions of the legislature, the administrator and the judiciary. A judiciary that is independent of and acting as a check on arbitrary exercise of legislative and executive force-out is an essential feature of a constitutional itself means. In a federal official system, the judiciary in addition serves as a tribunal for the final ratiocination of disputes between the union and its contri saveion units.Given the tremendous grandness of the piece and functions of the irresponsible philander & soaring solicits, various measures have been adopted to keep in line the independence of the judiciary. The judiciary in India is paradoxical institution. On the one eliminate royal courtrooms are extraordinarily formerful on the some other, its working seems manipulated by the executive. through and through a creati ve interpretation of the constitution, courts have non only exercised their author of judicial review but also have to managed to place the limits on the reason of parliament to amend the constitution. there are 20 cardinal object lesson pending in Indian courts, of which 3.2 million are in the full(prenominal) hails.The entire judicature has been divided into three tiers. At the concealment there is a tyrannical court (apex), below it is the eminent tourist court and the lowest rank is occupied by sessions court. The arrogant act is the highest court of jurisprudence. The constitution says that the law declared by the absolute court shall be binding on all small courts at heart the territory of India(Art. 141). Below the absolute appeal, are the gamy philanders located in the states. Under each highschool salute there are regularise Sessions Courts. Subordinate Courts and Courts of Minor Jurisdiction called Small receive courts. Given the grandness of the j udiciary in a federal system resting on peculiar(a) government , The Supreme Court was designed to pull in it the final dominance in the interpretation of the constitution . While framing the judicial provisions, the constituent assembly gave a great deal of at tennertion of the courts, the power of the irresponsible court and the issue of judicial review.The Constitution makes sure that the Supreme Court is independent as much as possible.Eligibility -The person must be a citizen of India - suppose of a gamy Court or of both or more much(prenominal) Courts in succession for at least(prenominal) louvre years, or -An Advocate of a mellow Court or of two or more much(prenominal) Courts in succession for at least ten years, or -The person must be, in the opinion of the President, a distinguished jurist. -A Judge of a High Court or retired Judge of the Supreme Court or High Courts may be found as an ad-hoc Judge of the Supreme Court.Appointment Though the President has the appointing license with the advice of his Council of ministers the appointment of the Supreme Court Judge has been lifted from the realm of unclouded politics by requiring the President to consult the hirer referee of India in the matter.Salary The salary and allowances of a judge cannot be reduced aft(prenominal) appointment.the salaraies of the judges are fixed by the constitution and providing that though the allowances,leave and bounty may be de margeined by law made by the parliament,these shall not be varied to the disadvantage of a judge during his term of dominance except may be during a financial unavoidableness.the adminstrative expenses of the Supreme Court,the salaries and allowances of the judge and staff of the Supreme Court shall not be subjected to vote in fantan and would be aerated on the amalgamated Fund of India.Contempt of court The Constituion allows the Supreme Court to punish allone for despite of all law court in India,under holds 129 and 142. The Supreme Court perforemed an unprecedneted litigate when it directed a sitting minister of the state of Maharashtra,Swaroop singh Naik,to be remand for one month incharge of contempt of court on 12 whitethorn 2006.This was the first time a serving minister was ever jailed.He was condemnationd for allowing an embezzled saw mill to run in a forest in Vidarbha near Tadoba santuary when he wa the Maharashtra forest minister.The court had directed in 1997 to the state ministers to not renew the licenses of sawmills in the forest areas.Violation of Laws The Supeme Court has the right to invalidate whatsoever law made by the fantan if it violates the Basic Stucture of the constituion or if it violates whatsoever of the fundamental rights of the citizens. On 24th April,1973 the Supreme Court in the Kesavananda Bharti v/s The state of Kerela fountain responded to the Parliament that although the amendments made were constituional the court still reserved for itself the discretion t o reject any constituional amendments passed by Parliament declaring that the amendments cannot change the Basic Structure.Removal The judge cannot be removed from office before time except by an cast of the president passed in the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha supported by a majority of the substance membership of that house and by a majority of not little than two thirds oh the members present and voting,and presented to the president in the uniform session for such(prenominal) removal on the ground of proved misbehaviour or incapacity. There were two judges who were removed by this process the first was Justice V.RamaswamiHe was the Punjab and Haryana High Court honcho justice of the year 1993 when he was impeached by the Lok Sabha by 196 votes because of his incapacity to do work.The Supreme Court charged him for his failure to do complete justice. The second was that of Justcice Soumitra Sen.He was the Calcutta High Court chief justice,the justice of India K.G Balakrishnanha d recommended him for impeachement to the Parliament because he had misappropriating rs.22.83 lakh than on than on 2009 a three member committee was set up and investigation was staretd and he was found guilty and finally on 17th August 2011 he was impeached by Rajya Sabha.The Supreme Court has master copy, appellate and advisory legal power.Its exclusive original jurisdiction extends to any dispute between the Government of India and one or more renders or between the Government of India and any suppose 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 gives 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 of habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto and certiorari to enforce them.The Supreme Court has been conferred with power to direct transfer of any civil or criminal case from one State High Court to another State High Court or from a Court subordinate to another State High Court. The Supreme Court, if satisfied that cases involving the aforesaid(prenominal) or really the same questions of law are pending before it and one or more High Courts or before two or more High Courts and that such questions are substantial questions of general importance, may withdraw a case or cases pending before the High Court or High Courts and dispose of all such cases itself. Under the Arbitration and atonement Act, 1996, International Commercial Arbitration can also be initiated in the Supreme Court.The appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court can be invoked by a certificate granted by the High Court concerned under Article 132(1), 133(1) or 134 of the Constitution in venerate of any notion, 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. 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 state question needs to be decided by the Supreme Court.In criminal cases, an appeal lies to the Supreme Court if the High Court (a) has on appeal reversed an order of acquittal of an accused person and sentenced him to shoemakers last 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 finale or to imprisonment for life or for a period of not less than 10 years, or (c) advised that the case is a fit one for appeal to the Supreme C ourt. Parliament is authorised to confer on the Supreme Court any encourage powers to entertain and hear appeals from any judgement, final order or sentence in a criminal proceeding of a High Court.The Supreme Court has also a very wide appellate jurisdiction over all Courts and Tribunals in India in as much as it may, in its discretion, grant special leave to appeal under Article 136 of the Constitution from any judgment, decree, determination, sentence or order in any cause or matter passed or made by any Court or Tribunal in the territory of India.The Supreme Court has special advisory jurisdiction in matters which may specifically be referred to it by the President of India under Article 143 of the Constitution. The dogmatic court is vested with the power to render advisory opinions on any question of fact or law that may be referred to it by the president. The advisory role of the supreme court is different from orinary jurisdiction in three senses. There is no litigation bet ween two partiesThe advisory opinion of the court is not binding on the govt. It is not executable as a judgement of the court. The practice of seeking advisory opinion of the supreme court helps the executive as a judgement of the court. It gives a soft opinion to the Indian govt. on some politically difficult issues. As in case of Babri Masjid complex and Ayodhya. The govt. decided to refer aspects of the dispute to the supreme court for an opinion. Since there was no legal point at issue, the referral to the supreme court had the potential for politicizing the judiciary instead resolving.Although the proceedings in the Supreme Court arise out of the judgments or orders made by the Subordinate Courts including the High Courts, but of late the Supreme Court has started entertaining matters in which arouse of the public at large is involved and the Court can be moved by any individual or group of persons either by filing a writ pray at the register Counter of the Court or by ad dressing a earn to Honble the captain Justice of India highlighting the question of public importance for invoking this jurisdiction.Such judgment is popularly known as Public Interest Litigation and several(prenominal) matters of public importance have be father landmark cases. This concept is strange to the Supreme Court of India only and perhaps no other Court in the world has been exercising this extraordinary jurisdiction. A Writ Petition filed at the Filing Counter is dealt with like any other Writ Petition and processed as such. In case of a letter addressed to Honble the fountainhead Justice of India the same is dealt with in accordance with the guidelines enclose for the purpose.If a petition is received from the jail or in any other criminal matter if the accused is unrepresented then an Advocate is establish as amicus curiae by the Court to defend and argue the case of the accused. In civil matters also the Court can appoint an Advocate as amicus curiae if it think s it necessary in case of an unrepresented party the Court can also appoint amicus curiae in any matter of general public importance or in which the interest of the public at large is involved.As in case of Kasab, A bench of justices Aftab Alam and C K Prasad pink-slipped 25-year-old Kasabs plea against his conviction and death sentence confirmed by the Bombay high court, saying he was given free-0and fair trial in the case. Kasabs confessional statement was very much voluntary except a very small portion, the bench held.It also dismissed Kasabs contender that the trial was not fair because the government did notprovide-1 him advocate during the time when he was arrested and put on trial.The apex court said the trial court had made repeated attempts o provide Kasab with a lawyer but he had spurned the offer initially and said he did not want to accept Indian lawyers. The judges said that in the totality of facts, evidences and circumstances the court had no option but to impose de ath sentence on Kasab. The bench also observed that going by the evidence, it was clear that the conspiracy and planning of the 26/11 attack was crosshatched in Pakistan.The High Court stands at the head of a States judicial administration. There are 18 High Courts in the country, three having jurisdiction over more than one State. Among the Union Territories Delhi only if has a High Court of its own. Other six Union Territories come under the jurisdiction of different State High Courts. Each High Court comprises of a Chief Justice and such other Judges as the President may, from time to time, appoint.The Chief Justice of a High Court is appointed by the President in consultation with the Chief Justice of India and the Governor of the State. The procedure for appointing Judges is the same except that the Chief Justice of the High Court concerned is also consulted. They hold office until the age of 62 years and are removable in the same manner as a Judge of the Supreme Court. To be eligible for appointment as a Judge one must be a citizen of India and have held a judicial office in India for ten years or must have practised as an Adovcate of a High Court or two or more such Courts in succession for a similar period.Each High Court has power to issue to any person within its jurisdiction directions, orders, or writs including writs which are in the nature of habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto and certiorari for enforcement of Fundamental Rights and for any other purpose. This power may also be exercised by any High Court exercising jurisdiction in relation to territories within which the cause of action, wholly or in part, arises for exercise of such power, notwithstanding that the post of such Government or authority or residence of such person is not within those territories.Each High Court has powers of oversight over all Courts within its jurisdiction. It can call for returns from such Courts, make and issue general rules and prescribe for ms to regulate their practice and proceedings and line up the manner and form in which book entries and accounts shall be kept.