Text

Introduction

Indian Judicial System has a long history right from the pre British days. In
the 18th century a uniform pattern of judiciary emerged and during the
British regime High Courts were established in presidency towns.
Thereafter, in 1937, the Federal Court was established to hear the appeals
from the High Courts.

Because of complexities of personal laws of Muslims and Hindus and

various customs & practices, there were initial difficulties in administration
of justice. After independence, the government focused on to have a
systematic judicial system throughout the country and many new
subordinate courts were established in various parts of the country.

The Britishers established the current pattern of legal system present in India
today, after the establishment of the English rule in the country. In the year
1857, the first step was taken in the direction of imparting formal legal
education in the country. The Britishers began enacting statutes, after the
revolt of 1857, which resulted in the introduction of a legal system that was
moulded along the lines of the legal system then prevailing in the United
Kingdom with an exception to laws pertaining to religious denominations in
India.

Indian Judicial System is largely based on English Common Law system

(where, law is developed by judges through their decisions, orders, and
judgments). It has created a federal system; with a Central government
coupled with State government.
Judicial System in India

There is a single integrated judicial system in India. It is organized on

pyramidal form. At the apex of the entire judicial system stands the Supreme
Court of India.

Immediately below the Supreme Court are the various High Courts and
below them are be subordinate courts in each state.

Supreme Court

The Supreme Court is the highest judicial tribunal in India. It consists of one
Chief Justice and other Judge. At present is located only in the capital city of
Delhi, without any benches in any part of the nation, and is presided by the
Chief Justice of India.

The Supreme Court of India has many Benches for the litigation, and this
apex court is not only the final court of permissible Appeal, but also deals
with interstate matters, and matters comprising of more than one state, and
the matters between the Union Government and any one or more states, as
the matters on its original side. The President of India can always seek
consultation and guidance including the opinion of the apex court and its
judges. This court also has powers to punish anybody for its own contempt.

The largest bench of the Supreme Court of India is called the Constitution
Bench and comprises of 5 or 7 judges, depending on the importance attached
of the matters before it, as well as the workload of the court.

The apex court comprises only of various benches comprising of the

Divisional benches of 2 and 3 judges, and the Full benches of 3 or 5 judges.
They are appointed by the President of India. A Judge continues to remain in
office till the age of 65 years. He may be removed by the President of the
Republic on a report of Parliament on, grounds of proved misbehavior or
incapacity.

The Supreme Court has original, Appellate, writ and Advisory Jurisdictions.

Original Jurisdiction:

The Supreme Court has exclusive original jurisdiction in any dispute

between

i. The Government of India and one or more states or

ii. The Union Government and any State or States on the one side and
one or more States on the other,
iii. Two or more states, if the disputes involve a legal right.

Appellate Jurisdictions:

When the matter is Constitutional, an appeal lies to the Supreme Court when
the High Court certifies that the case involves a substantial question of law
as to the interpretation of the constitution.

In civil cases, an appeal lies to the Supreme Court when the High Court
certifies that the case involve a substantial question of law of general public
importance.

In criminal matters, an appeal lies to the Supreme Court when the High
Court reverses the acquittal order of the lower court and sentences him to
death.

Writ Jurisdiction:
The Supreme Court of India is the protector of the fundamental rights of
citizens. It may issue writs in the nature of mandamus prohibition, habeas
corpus, certiorari, and quo warrantor for the enforcement of the rights and
liberties of the people.

Advisory Jurisdiction:

Under the Constitution of India, the President of the Republic can refer to
the Supreme Court any question of law or fact of public importance for its
opinion. And the Supreme Court may report to the President its opinion
thereon.

And lastly, the Supreme Court may grant special leave to appeal from the
judgment of any court of India.

The Supreme Court is the interpreter and guardian of the constitution of

India. It can annual the unconstitutional laws and orders of the Union, and
the State Governments.

This court also has powers to punish anybody for its own contempt.

High Courts

The constitution of India envisages a High Court for each state. Parliament
may, however, by law establish a common High court for two or more
States.

Each High Court consists of a Chief Justice and one other Judges as the
President of India may determine from time to time. The Judges are
appointed by the president in consultation with the Chief Justice of India and
the Governor of the concerned state. The Judges retire at the age of 62. A
Judges may be removed by the President of India on a report of Parliament.

Jurisdiction of High Court:

Every High Court enjoys original jurisdiction with respect to revenue and its
collection, cases of succession, divorce etc.

In its appellate Jurisdiction, it hears appeals from the lower courts in cases
concerning sales tax, income tax, copy right, patent-right etc. The High
Court is a court of record and its proceedings and decisions are referred to in
future cases.

A High court can issue writs for the enforcement of fundamental rights or
for any other such purpose.

A High Court supervises the working of all subordinate courts and frames
rules and regulations for the transaction of business.

The High Court is empowered to interpret the constitution of India. It can

review the laws of the State Legislature and may declare them null and void
if they go against the provisions of the constitution.

Again, if a High court is satisfied that a case pending in a lower court

involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the
constitution, it my dispose of the case itself.

Subordinate Courts

There are subordinate courts below the High court in each state.

The courts are under the complete control of the High court. The lower court
(e.g. Nyaya Panchayat or Munsiffs court) deals with minor cases while the
higher courts (e.g., subordinate Judge’s court or District Judge’s court) deal
with important cases.

Appeals lie to the higher courts from the lower courts. An appeal may also
lie to the High Court against the decisions of the District judge’s court or the
Session Judge’s court.

In a Presidency town, there are city civil courts and Metropolitan

Magistrates courts.

In this connection, we are to note that most of the Judges of the subordinate
courts are appointed by the Governor in consultation with the High Court of
the concerned State.

Lok Adalats

Lok Adalats, which are voluntary agencies, are monitored by the State Legal
Aid and Advice Boards. They have proved to be a successful alternative
forum for resolving of disputes through the conciliatory method.

The Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 provides statutory status to the
legal aid movement and it also provides for setting up of Legal Services
Authorities at the Central, State and District levels. These authorities will
have their own funds. Further, Lok Adalats, which are at present informal
agencies will acquire statutory status. Every award of Lok Adalats shall be
deemed to be a decree of a civil court or order of a Tribunal and shall be
final and binding on the parties to the dispute. It also provides that in respect
of cases decided at a Lok Adalat, the court fee paid by the parties will be
refunded.

Advocate General
There is an Advocate General for each State, appointed by the Governor,
who holds office during the pleasure of the Governor. He must be a person
qualified to be appointed as a Judge of High Court. His duty is to give
advice to State Governments upon such legal matters and to perform such
other duties of legal character, as may be referred or assigned to him by the
Governor. The Advocate General has the right to speak and take part in the
proceedings of the State Legislature without the right to vote.

Salient Features of Indian Judiciary

The Constitution of India provides for a single integrated judicial system. It

also provides for an independent and powerful judicial system. Judiciary in
India acts as the guardian protector of the Constitution and the fundamental
rights of the people. The Constitution establishes a single integrated judicial
system for the whole of India.

Independence of Judiciary:

The Constitution of India makes judiciary truly independent. It provides for:

(a) Appointment of judges by the President,

(b) High qualifications for appointment as judges,

(c) Removal of judges by a difficult method of impeachment,

(d) High salaries, pension and other service benefits for judges,

(e) Independent establishment for the Judiciary, and

(f) Adequate powers and functional autonomy for the Judiciary.

All these features together make the Indian Judiciary an independent

judiciary.
Judiciary as the Interpreter of the Constitution:

The Constitution of India is a written and enacted constitution. The right to

interpret and clarify the Constitution has been given to the Supreme Court. It
is the final interpreter of the provisions of the Constitution of India.

Judicial Review:

The Constitution of India is the supreme law of the land. The Supreme Court
acts as the interpreter and protector of the Constitution. It is the guardian of
the fundamental rights and freedoms of the people. For performing this role,
it exercises the power of judicial review. The Supreme Court has the power
to determine the constitutional validity of all laws. It can reject any such law,
which is held to be unconstitutional. High Courts also exercise this power.

Supreme Court as the Arbiter of legal disputes between the Union and
States:

The Constitution gives to the Supreme Court the jurisdiction in all cases of
disputes:

(a) Between the Government of India and one or more states,

(b) Between the Government of India and any state or states on one side and
one or more states on the other, and

(c) Between two or more states.

Guardian of Fundamental Rights:

Indian judiciary acts as the guardian of fundamental rights and freedoms of

the people. The people have the Right to Constitutional Remedies under
which they can seek the protection of the courts for preventing a violation or
for meeting any threat to their rights. The Supreme Court and the High
Courts have the power to issue writs for this purpose.

Separation of Judiciary from the Executive:

The Constitution of India provides for a separation between the judiciary and
the other two organs of the government. The judiciary is neither a branch of
the executive nor in any way subordinate to it. The judicial administration in
India is organised and run in accordance with the rules and orders of the
Supreme Court.

Open Trial:

The courts in India are free. These conduct open trials. The accused is
always given full opportunity to defend himself. The state provides free
legal aid to the poor and needy.

Judicial Activism:

Indian Judicial System has been becoming more and more active. The
Supreme Court has been coming out with judicial decisions and directives
aimed at active protection of public interest and human rights. Judiciary has
been giving directives to public officials for ensuring a better security for the
rights of the public.

Public Interest Litigation System:

Under this system the courts of law in India can initiate and enforce action
for securing any significant public or general interest, which is being
adversely affected or is likely to be so by the action of any agency, public or
private. Under it any citizen or a group or a voluntary organisation, or even a
court herself, can bring to notice any case demanding action for protecting
and satisfying a public interest.

It provides for an easy, simple, speedier and less expensive system of

providing judicial relief to the aggrieved public. With all these features, the
Indian Judicial System is an independent, impartial, free, powerful and
efficient judicial system.

In 2009, law commission of India suggested that considering the alarming

situation and the pendency of cases and the constitutional rights of a litigant
for a speedy and fair trial, the Government of India should direct the State
authorities to set up Fast Track Courts in the country, which alone, in the
opinion of the Law Commission, will solve the perennial problem of
pendency of cases. The Indian Constitution is the source of every law that
was and is prevalent in our society.

The Constitution guarantees to all Indian citizens equal protection of public

as well as personal rights. But these rights are of no avail if an individual has
no means to get them enforced. The enforcement of the rights has to be
through the courts, but judicial procedure is very complex, costly and
dilatory putting the poor at a distance from justice.

Large population, more litigation and lack of adequate infrastructure are the
major factors that hamper our justice system. Regular adjudication
procedures through the constant efforts of Legal Services Authorities will
act as catalysts in curing these maladies of our system. With the march of
time, new demands emerge, which sometimes make the existing system
outdated or non-functional, requiring it to be replaced by a new one. Law
should also respond to the demands of the society. The alternate dispute
resolution methods have evolved as a result of this vision.

The Family Courts Act, 1984 was enacted to provide for the establishment
of Family Courts with a view to promote conciliation in, and secure speedy
settlement of, disputes relating to marriage and family affairs and for matters
connected therewith.

The Judiciary is under great pressure. The Supreme Court has directed that
we should have 5 times the number of judges we currently have. [ All India
Judges’ Association v. UOI, , (2002) 4 SCC 247]

For the judicial reform in India, we need:

• Speedy justice

• Reduction in costs of litigation

• Systematic running of the courts

• Faith in the judicial system

• Legislative reform to remove the bottlenecks that are adversely

affecting the adjudication;
• Strengthening of the Bar;
• Strengthening of legal education;
• Legislative reform to strengthen the powers of judges to control
judicial processes to ensure just and efficient outcomes in line

Conclusion
The Judicial system however has a unified structure. The Supreme Court, the
High Courts and the lower Courts constitute a single Judiciary. Broadly
there is a three-tier division. Each District has a District Court and each State
a High Court. The Supreme Court of India is the Apex Court. Each State has
its own laws constituting Courts subordinate to the District Courts. Besides,
a number of judicial Tribunals have been set up in specialized areas. The
significant Tribunals are: Company Law Board; Monopolistic and
Restrictive Trade Practices Commission; Securities Appellate Tribunal;
Consumer Protection Forum; Board for Industrial and Financial
Reconstruction; Customs and Excise Control Tribunal; Tax Tribunal; etc.
These Tribunals function under the supervisory jurisdiction of the High
Court where they may be situated. The Indian judiciary has a reputation of
being independent and non-partisan. Lok Adalats, Nyaya Panchayats, Legal
Services Authorities are also part of the campaign to take justice to the
people and ensure that all people have equal access to justice in spite of
various barriers like social and economic backwardness.