Jurisdiction of Supreme Court

Jurisdiction of Supreme Court ranges from Original, to writ, to appellate to advisory. The Supreme Court plays an important role in safeguarding the Constitution and citizens’ fundamental rights, resolving disputes between government bodies and interpreting legal issues. With a wide array of jurisdiction and powers, the Supreme Court stands as a bastion of justice in the democratic framework. In this article, you will learn about various Jurisdiction and Powers of Supreme Court all of which are very important topic for GS Paper-2 Polity & Governance of UPSC CSE Exam. To explore more interesting UPSC Polity concepts Class 11 and Class 9 similar to Jurisdiction of Supreme Court in India, check out other articles of IASToppers. 

Table of Content

• Introduction
• Jurisdiction and Powers of Supreme Court
• Original Jurisdiction of Supreme Court
• Writ Jurisdiction of Supreme Court
• Appellate Jurisdiction of Supreme Court
• Advisory Jurisdiction of Supreme Court
• A Court of Record
• Judicial Review Power of Supreme Court
• Constitutional Interpretation
• Other Powers of Supreme Court
• Conclusion
• FAQs on Jurisdiction and Powers of Supreme Court

Introduction

• The Supreme Court is empowered with extensive authority and a vast array of responsibilities by the Constitution.
• It functions not only as a Federal Court, similar to the U.S. Supreme Court, but also serves as the final appellate body, much like the Upper House of the British Parliament, the House of Lords.
• Its role also encompasses interpreting and safeguarding the Constitution, and ensuring the protection of citizens’ fundamental rights.

Jurisdiction and Powers of Supreme Court

Jurisdiction and Powers of Supreme Court can be categorized the following segments:

1. Original Jurisdiction of Supreme Court
2. Writ Jurisdiction of Supreme Court
3. Appellate Jurisdiction of Supreme Court
4. Advisory Jurisdiction of Supreme Court
5. A Court of Record
6. Power of Judicial Review of Supreme Court
7. Constitutional Interpretation
8. Other Powers

Original Jurisdiction of Supreme Court

• The Supreme Court, functioning as a federal court, resolves conflicts among different constituents of the Indian Federation.
• In detail, it arbitrates:
  • Disputes involving the Central Government and one or more states.
  • Conflicts between the Central Government and any state or states on one side and one or more other states on the opposing side.
  • Disputes between two or more states.
• In these types of federal disagreements, the Supreme Court has “exclusive original” jurisdiction. However, two aspects should be highlighted regarding this jurisdiction.
• Dispute must raise a question (legal or factual) that impacts the existence or extent of a legal right, excluding political issues.
• Supreme Court cannot entertain any lawsuit initiated by an individual against the Central Government or a state under this jurisdiction.

Moreover, the Supreme Court’s jurisdiction does not cover the following:

• Disputes resulting from any pre-Constitution treaty, agreement, covenant, engagement, or other similar instruments.
• Disputes arising from any treaty, agreement, etc., which explicitly state that the said jurisdiction does not apply to such a dispute.
• Disputes over inter-state water distribution.
• Issues referred to the Finance Commission.
• Balancing of specific expenses and pensions between the Central Government and the states.
• Ordinary commercial disputes between the Central Government and the states.
• States’ claims for damages against the Central Government.

In 1961, the first lawsuit under the Supreme Court’s original jurisdiction was initiated by the West Bengal state against the Central Government. The state government questioned the constitutional legitimacy of the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957, enacted by the Parliament. Nevertheless, the Supreme Court rejected the lawsuit, affirming the Act’s validity.

Writ Jurisdiction of Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has jurisdiction under article 32 to enforce citizens’ fundamental rights through various writs such as habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto, and certiorari.

Types of Legal Instruments used by the Supreme Court under Article 32

• Habeas Corpus: It literally means ‘to present the body’. It refers to a legal instrument used to challenge the unlawful imprisonment of an individual by a governmental entity or private party. The court commands the custodian to bring the unlawfully detained person to court under the power of this writ.
• Mandamus: It compels a public official to carry out his or her legal responsibilities. It acts as a tool for enforcing duty-bound activities that a public officer might be ignoring or neglecting.
• Certiorari: It literally means ‘To be certified’. The Supreme Court uses this writ to nullify any orders made by subordinate courts if they are found to have exceeded their power or jurisdiction.
• Prohibition: Similar in nature to Certiorari, this writ acts as a preventive measure. Instead of cancelling an order, it inhibits a lower court from making a decision that the Supreme Court believes steps beyond its jurisdiction.
• Quo Warranto: Translating to ‘by what authority,’ this writ questions the legitimacy of an individual’s claim to a public office. It’s employed against any entity that allegedly holds a public office without a legitimate entitlement.

Original Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court

• There is a difference between the Supreme Court’s original jurisdiction in cases of federal disputes versus cases involving fundamental rights.
• In federal disputes, the Supreme Court holds exclusive jurisdiction. When it comes to issues pertaining to fundamental rights, the Supreme Court shares jurisdiction with the high courts.
• In other words, if a citizen’s fundamental rights are breached, they have the option to approach either the Supreme Court or a high court directly as both courts can issue writs.

Difference between Writ Jurisdiction of High Court and Supreme Court

• The Supreme Court is limited to issuing writs exclusively for enforcing fundamental rights, not for any other reasons.
• The high court can issue writs for not only enforcing fundamental rights but also for other objectives. This implies that high courts have a broader writ jurisdiction than the Supreme Court.
• However, the Constitution does allow for the Parliament to extend the Supreme Court’s power to issue writs for additional purposes if necessary.

Appellate Jurisdiction of 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. Supreme Court’s appellate jurisdiction can be broadly grouped into four categories:

• Appeals in constitutional matters
• Appeals in civil matters
• Appeals in criminal matters
• Appeals by special leave

Appeals in constitutional matters

• Constitutional jurisdiction: Appeals against the judgement of a high court in constitutional issues can be directed to the Supreme Court, if the judgement of a high court involves a significant question that necessitates constitutional interpretation.

Appeals in civil matters

• Civil appellate jurisdiction:  The Supreme Court can hear appeals in civil cases on the receipt of a certificate from a high court stating that:
• The case brings up a substantial question of law of general importance, and
• The question calls for a resolution by the Supreme Court.

Appeals in Criminal Matters

• Criminal appellate jurisdiction: The Supreme Court considers appeals against verdicts in criminal trials from a high court in the following scenarios:
• The high court has overturned an acquittal order and declared the accused guilty, sentencing them to death,
• The high court has proactively taken up any case from a lower court, found the accused guilty, and sentenced them to death, or
• The high court certifies that the case is suitable for appeal to the Supreme Court.

In the first two scenarios, the Supreme Court becomes the appellate court by default. However, if the high court overturns a conviction and orders the acquittal of the accused, there is no privilege to appeal in the Supreme Court.

In 1970, the Parliament expanded the Supreme Court’s jurisdiction in criminal appeals. Now, an appeal can be made to the Supreme Court if the high court:

• Overturns an acquittal order on appeal, sentencing the accused to life imprisonment or imprisonment for 10 years,
• Takes up a case from any lower court, convicts the accused, and sentences them to life imprisonment or imprisonment for 10 years.

In addition, the Supreme Court’s appellate jurisdiction extends to all civil and criminal cases that were previously within the Federal Court of India’s jurisdiction to hear appeals from the high court but not were under the Supreme Court’s civil and criminal appellate jurisdiction as stated above.

Appeals Through Special Permission

The Supreme Court has the authority to use its discretion to allow special appeals from any judgement passed by any court (with the exception of military tribunals and courts martial). This provision entails the following four aspects:

• It’s a discretionary power and therefore cannot be claimed as a right.
• It can be granted in any judgement, whether final or interim.
• It can pertain to any matter, be it constitutional, civil, criminal, income-tax, labour, revenue, advocates, and so on.
• It can be granted against any court or tribunal, not necessarily a high court (except a military court, of course).

Advisory Jurisdiction of Supreme Court

• Article 143 of the Constitution grants the President the ability to consult the Supreme Court for advice in two specific types of situations:
  • On any significant legal or factual questions that have surfaced or are anticipated to surface.
    • In this situation, the Supreme Court holds the discretion to either provide or withhold its opinion when requested by the President.
  • On any conflict stemming from pre-Constitution pacts, treaties, promises, agreements, deeds, or similar legal instruments.
    • In this situation, the Supreme Court is obligated to provide its opinion to the President.
• In both instances, the Supreme Court’s perspective is purely consultative in nature and doesn’t carry the weight of a court verdict. So, president has the freedom to either accept or disregard the opinion.
• The idea of advisory jurisdiction for the Supreme Court is borrowed from the Canada.

A Court of Record

The Supreme Court functions as a Court of Record and holds dual capacities:

Documenting and Upholding Legal Decisions:

• Every decision, action, and proceeding of the Supreme Court is documented for continuous reference and evidence.
• These documents are of crucial importance, and their authenticity can’t be disputed when brought up in any court.
• These records function as recognized legal benchmarks and valuable sources for legal consultation.

Authority to Penalize for Contempt of Court:

• Under Articles 129 and 142 of the Constitution, the Supreme Court has the power to punish for contempt of court.
• In a 1991 resolution, the Supreme Court declared its power to punish not only for contempt against itself but also that against high courts, subordinate courts, and tribunals throughout the nation.

Types of Contempt of Court:

Contempt of court can take two forms: civil or criminal.

• Civil contempt involves deliberately disregarding a court’s judgment, order, writ or other legal process, or intentionally breaking a promise made to a court.
• Criminal contempt includes the dissemination of any content or action that disrespects or undermines the authority of a court, impedes or disrupts the rightful progression of a legal proceeding, or hinders the administration of justice in any other way.

However, harmless dissemination and distribution of certain content, unbiased and precise reporting of court proceedings, and fair critique of judicial decisions and commentary on judiciary’s administrative aspects do not count as contempt of court.

Judicial Review Power of Supreme Court

• Judicial review refers to the Supreme Court’s authority to scrutinize the legality of legislative laws and executive orders from both Central and state governments in accordance with the Constitution.
• If, upon scrutiny, they are determined to be in violation of the Constitution (ultra-vires), they can be deemed unlawful, unconstitutional, and invalid (null and void) by the Supreme Court.
• As a result, these laws or orders cannot be enforced by the Government.

Constitutional Interpretation

The Supreme Court holds the highest authority in deciphering the Constitution. Its role is to provide a definitive understanding of the Constitution’s provisions, structure, and language.

To do this, the Supreme Court employs a variety of legal doctrines, which essentially act as guiding principles. These significant legal doctrines include:

• Doctrine of Harmonious Construction
• Doctrine of Pith and Substance
• Doctrine of Waiver
• Doctrine of Territorial Nexus
• Doctrine of Colourable Legislation
• Doctrine of Liberal Interpretation
• Doctrine of Implied Powers
• Doctrine of Severability
• Doctrine of Precedent
• Doctrine of Eclipse
• Doctrine of Prospective Overruling
• Doctrine of Occupied Field
• Doctrine of Incidental and Ancillary Powers

Other Powers

In addition to the above, the Supreme Court possesses a wide range of other powers:

• It has the exclusive, original and final authority to resolve disputes concerning the election of the President and Vice-President.
• It investigates the behaviour of the Chairman and members of the Union Public Service Commission based on a request by the President. If they are found guilty of misconduct, the Supreme Court can suggest their removal to the President. The President must follow the Supreme Court’s recommendation in such matters.
• The Supreme Court retains the ability to re-evaluate and amend its own verdicts or orders, thereby acting as a self-regulating body.
  • For instance, in the Kesavananda Bharati case (1973), the Supreme Court revised its earlier judgment from the Golak Nath case (1967).
• The Supreme Court can take up cases that are currently being considered by the High Courts and adjudicate them independently. Furthermore, it can relocate a case or an appeal from one High Court to another.
• The laws laid down by the Supreme Court are compulsory for all other courts within India. Its judgments or orders are enforceable nationwide. All civil and judicial authorities in the country must support the Supreme Court in upholding these judgments or orders.
• The Supreme Court has oversight and administrative control over all courts and tribunals operating across the country.

The extent of the Supreme Court’s jurisdiction and powers concerning matters on the Union list can be expanded by the Parliament. In addition, its authority and powers relating to other issues can be extended through a special agreement between the Central government and the states.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court of India, with its extensive powers and responsibilities, serves as important pillar of India’s democracy. From original to writ and appellate jurisdiction, it upholds justice, protects fundamental rights, and ensures constitutional integrity. supreme court’s jurisdictions, including the advisory and the power of judicial review, underline its expansive reach and the pivotal role it plays in the administration of justice and the maintenance of the constitutional order in the country.

Ref:Source-1

Other Articles in Polity & Governance
Criminal Justice System in India	Lok Adalat
Lokayukta	Amendment of the Indian Constitution
Contempt of Court	Lokpal

FAQs(frequently asked question)