Jurisdiction and Powers of the Supreme Court – Part 01

The Supreme Court of India, as the apex judicial authority, holds extensive jurisdiction and powers, paralleling the Federal Court of the USA and functioning as a final court of appeal akin to the British House of Lords. It serves as the ultimate guardian of the Constitution and fundamental rights, endowed with advisory and supervisory capabilities. This article explores the various jurisdictions and powers conferred upon the Supreme Court, including original, writ, appellate, and advisory jurisdictions.

Jurisdiction and Powers of the Supreme Court of India: An In-Depth Analysis

The Role and Authority of the Supreme Court in India’s Legal Framework

• Extensive Jurisdiction and Powers: The Constitution confers a very extensive jurisdiction and powers to the Supreme Court which  is similar to a Federal Court  of the USA. 
• Final Court of Appeal: It  also acts as  a final court of appeal like the British House of Lords. 
• Guardian of the Constitution: It is  the final interpreter and guardian of the Constitution and also as a guarantor of the fundamental rights of the citizens. 
• Advisory and Supervisory Powers: Further, it also  has advisory and supervisory powers. 

The jurisdiction and powers of the Supreme Court can be classified into the following:

• Original Jurisdiction.
• Writ Jurisdiction.
• Appellate Jurisdiction.
• Advisory Jurisdiction.
• A Court of Record.
• Power of Judicial Review.
• Enlargement of the Supreme Court’s power.
• Binding Nature of the Supreme Court’ decision.
• Enforcement of decrees and orders of the Supreme Court.
• Constitutional Interpretation.
• Other Powers.

Original Jurisdiction (Article 131)

• • Dispute Resolution Between Federation Units: The Supreme Court decides the disputes between different units of the Indian Federation.

Types of Disputes: 

• • Between the Centre and one or more states
  • Between the Centre and any state or states on one side and one or more other states on the other side
  • Between two or more states.
• Exclusive Original Jurisdiction: For federal disputes, the Supreme Court has exclusive original jurisdiction.
  • Exclusive means no other court can decide such disputes and
  • Original means, the power to hear such disputes in the first instance, and not by way of appeal.

• Important Points: In case of the exclusive original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, two points should be noted.

• 1. Exclusion of Political Questions: The dispute must involve a question of whether of law or fact, therefore, the questions of political nature are excluded from it.
  2. Limitation on Private Citizen Suits: Any suit brought before the Supreme Court by a private citizen against the Centre or a state cannot be entertained.
•  Limitations of the Supreme Court’s Jurisdiction: Further, this jurisdiction of the Supreme Court does not extend for :

• A dispute arising out of any pre-Constitution treaty, agreement, covenant, engagement.
• A dispute arising out of any treaty, agreement, etc., which specifically provides that the said jurisdiction does not extend to such a dispute.
• Inter-state water disputes.
• Matters referred to the Finance Commission.
• Adjustment of certain expenses and pensions between the Centre and the states.
• Ordinary dispute of a Commercial nature between the Centre and the states.
• Recovery of damages by a state against the Centre.

Writ Jurisdiction (Article 32)

• Empowerment of the Supreme Court to Issue Writs: The Supreme Court is empowered to issue writs including habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo- warranto and certiorari for the enforcement of the fundamental rights of an aggrieved citizen.  
• Original Jurisdiction in Writ Jurisdiction: The Supreme Court in this regard has original jurisdiction in the sense that an aggrieved citizen can directly go to the Supreme Court,  and not necessarily by way of appeal.
• Non-Exclusive Writ Jurisdiction: However, the writ jurisdiction of the Supreme Court is not exclusive. 
  • It means that when the Fundamental Rights of a citizen are violated, the aggrieved party has the option of moving either the High Court or the Supreme Court directly.
• Differences in Original Jurisdiction: Therefore, the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court with regard to federal disputes is different from its original jurisdiction with regard to disputes relating to fundamental rights.
  • In the first case: it is exclusive where the parties involved are units of federation.
  • In the second case: it is between a citizen and the Government (Central or state).
• Comparison with High Court: The Supreme Court can issue writs only for the enforcement of the Fundamental Rights and not for other purposes. 
  • On the other hand, the High Court can issue writs not only for the enforcement of fundamental rights but also for other purposes. 
  • It means that the writ jurisdiction of the High Court is wider than that of the Supreme Court. 
• Parliamentary Power: But, the Parliament can confer power on the Supreme Court to issue writs for other purposes also.

Appellate Jurisdiction

• Supreme Court as a Court of Appeal: The Supreme Court is primarily a court of appeal and hears appeals against the judgments of the lower courts. 
• Wide Appellate Jurisdiction: It enjoys a wide appellate jurisdiction which can be classified under four heads:

1. Appeals in Constitutional Matters (Article 132)

• An appeal can be made to the Supreme Court against the judgement of a High Court if the High Court certifies that the case involves a substantial question of law that requires the interpretation of the Constitution.

2. Appeals in Civil Matters (Article 133)

• An appeal lies to the Supreme Court from any judgement of a High Court if the High Court certifies–
  • The case involves a substantial question of law of general importance.
  • The question needs to be decided by the Supreme Court.

3. Appeals in Criminal Matters (Article  134)

• The Supreme Court hears appeals against the judgment in a criminal proceeding of a High Court if the High Court:
  • Reverses an Order of Acquittal: The High Court has reversed an order of acquittal of an accused person and sentenced him to death.
  • Takes a Case from Subordinate Courts: The High Court has taken before itself any case from any subordinate court that convicted the accused person and sentenced him to death.
  • Certifies the Case for Appeal: The High Court certifies that the case is fit for appeal to the Supreme Court.
• Right to Appeal: For the first two cases, an appeal lies to the Supreme Court as a matter of right (i.e., without any certificate from the High Court). 
• However, if the High Court has reversed the order of conviction and has ordered the acquittal of the accused, there is no right to appeal to the Supreme Court.
• Extension of Appellate Jurisdiction: Furthermore, the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court extends to all civil and criminal cases in which the Federal Court of India had jurisdiction to hear appeals from the High Court but which are not covered under the civil and criminal appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court mentioned above.

4. Appeal by Special Leave (Article 136)

• Discretionary Power: The Supreme Court is authorized to grant, in its discretion, special leave to appeal from any judgment in any matter passed by any court or tribunal in the country (except military tribunals and court-martial). This provision contains four aspects:
  • No Right to Claim: It is a discretionary power and hence cannot be claimed as a matter of right.
  • Applicability to Judgments: It can be granted in any judgment, whether final or interlocutory.
  • Matters Covered: It may relate to any matter—constitutional, civil, criminal, income-tax, labor, revenue, advocates, etc.
  • Courts and Tribunals: It can be granted against any court or tribunal and not necessarily against a High Court (except for military courts).
• Broad Jurisdiction: This provision gives the Supreme Court a broad jurisdiction to hear appeals. 
• The Supreme Court itself stated that this power is extraordinary and exceptional, and it should be used carefully and rarely, only in special situations. 
• There is no fixed rule or formula to limit the use of this power.

Advisory Jurisdiction

• Categories of Matters for Presidential Opinion: As per (Article 143) of the Constitution it authorises the President to seek the opinion of the Supreme Court in the two categories of matters:
  • Question of Public Importance: On any question of law or fact of public importance which has arisen or which is likely to arise:- here, the Supreme Court may tender or may refuse to tender its opinion to the President.
  • Dispute from Pre-Constitution Treaties: On any dispute arising out of any pre-Constitution treaty, agreement, covenant, engagement:- here, the Supreme Court ‘must’ tender its opinion to the President
• Nature of the Supreme Court’s Opinion: In both these cases, the Supreme Court’s opinion is only advisory and not a judicial pronouncement. 
  • Therefore, it is not binding upon the President and may follow or may not follow the opinion. 
  • But, it facilitates the government to have an authoritative legal opinion on a matter to be decided by it.

• Past References by the President: Till now, the President has made several references to the Supreme Court under its advisory jurisdiction (also known as consultative jurisdiction) which we can see below:

• • Delhi Laws Act in 1951
  • Berubari Union in 1960
  • Sea Customs Act of 1963
  • Keshav Singh’s case relating to the privileges of the Legislature in 1964
  • Presidential Election in 1974
  • Jammu and Kashmir Resettlement Act in 1982
  • Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal in 1992
  • Rama Janma Bhumi case in 1993
  • The consultation process to be adopted by the Chief Justice of India in 1998
  • Legislative competence of the Centre and States on natural gas and liquefied natural gas in 2001
  • Constitutional validity of the Election Commission’s decision on deferring the Gujarat Assembly Elections (2002).
  • Punjab Termination of Agreements Act in 2004.
  • 2G spectrum case verdict.

Court of Record (Article 129)

• Powers of the Supreme Court as a Court of Record: The Supreme Court has two powers when having power of a Court of Record

• • Recording of Judgements and Proceedings: The judgements, proceedings and acts of the Supreme Court are recorded for perpetual memory and testimony and are admitted to be of evidentiary value and cannot be questioned when produced before any court.
    •  It is also recognised as a legal precedent and legal reference.
  • Power to Punish for Contempt of Court: It has the power to punish for contempt of court, either with simple imprisonment for a term up to six months or with a fine up to ₹2,000 or with both. 
• Scope of Contempt Power: In 1991, the Supreme Court held that it has the power to punish for contempt not only of itself but also for other Courts – high courts, subordinate courts and tribunals functioning in the entire country.
• Contempt of Court may be Civil or Criminal. It means wilful disobedience to any judgement order of a court or wilful breach of an undertaking given to a court. 
  • Civil contempt means wilful disobedience to any judgement, order, writ or other process of a court.
• Criminal contempt means the publication of any matter or doing an act which–
• Scandalises or lowers the authority of a court
• Prejudices or interferes with the due course of a judicial proceeding
• Interferes or obstructs the administration of justice in any other manner.
• Exceptions to Contempt of Court: Also  innocent publication and distribution of some matter, fair and reasonable criticism of judicial acts and comment on the administrative side of the judiciary do not amount to contempt of court.

Power of Judicial Review (Article 137)

• Judicial Review: This term denotes the power of the Supreme Court to examine the constitutionality of legislative enactments and executive orders of not only  the Central but also  state governments. 
• Declaration of Unconstitutionality: If a legislative enactment or executive order is found to violate the Constitution (ultra vires), it can be declared illegal, unconstitutional, and invalid by the Supreme Court. 
• Non-Enforceability: Consequently, such laws or orders cannot be enforced by the Government.
• Power to Review: Additionally, the Supreme Court has the power to review any judgment pronounced or order made by it.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the jurisdiction and powers of the Supreme Court are pivotal in maintaining the rule of law and safeguarding the rights of citizens in India. 

• Its roles, ranging from resolving federal disputes to issuing writs for enforcing fundamental rights, underscore its critical position in the democratic framework. 
• By exercising its powers judiciously, the Supreme Court not only interprets the Constitution but also ensures justice, reinforcing its status as the custodian of democracy.

DOWNLOAD PDF