Supreme Court of India

The Supreme Court is the apex judicial body of India — guardian of the Constitution, protector of Fundamental Rights, and final arbiter of all legal disputes. Understanding its jurisdiction, collegium system, key articles (Art. 124–147), and landmark cases is indispensable for GS-II and Essay Paper.

UPSC Prelims · Mains GS-II Laxmikanth Ch. 25–26 ~22 min read Arts 124–147 Collegium & NJAC

Conceptual Clarity
Constitution & Composition (Art. 124)
Appointment — Collegium System
Qualifications & Tenure
Removal — Impeachment
Independence of Judiciary
Jurisdiction — All Types
Original Jurisdiction (Art. 131)
Writ Jurisdiction (Art. 32)
Appellate Jurisdiction
Advisory Jurisdiction (Art. 143)
Other Constitutional Powers
Court of Record (Art. 129)
SC as Guardian of Constitution
Key Recent Developments
Prelims PYQs
Mains PYQs
15-Minute Revision Box

Conceptual Clarity — Apex Court & Constitutional Guardian

India has a single integrated judicial system with the Supreme Court at its apex. Unlike the USA (which has separate federal and state court hierarchies), all courts in India — from district courts to High Courts — are ultimately subordinate to the Supreme Court. The SC serves a triple role: (1) federal court (Centre-State disputes), (2) final court of appeal, and (3) guardian of the Constitution and Fundamental Rights.

Art. 141: Law declared by SC is binding on ALL courts in India — making SC decisions the supreme source of judge-made law.
Art. 142: SC can pass any decree/order necessary for "complete justice" — its most extraordinary power.
Art. 32: Dr Ambedkar called it the "heart and soul of the Constitution" — the right to approach SC directly for FR enforcement.

1. Constitution & Composition (Art. 124)

1.1 Establishment

The Supreme Court of India was established on 26 January 1950 (when the Constitution came into force).
It replaced the Federal Court of India (established 1937 under the Government of India Act, 1935).
Seat: Delhi (Art. 130) — but the Chief Justice of India may, with the approval of the President, appoint other places where the SC may sit.

1.2 Composition — Strength Over Time

Art. 124(1) provides that there shall be a Supreme Court of India consisting of a Chief Justice of India (CJI) and not more than such number of other judges as Parliament may by law prescribe.

Year / Act	Total Strength (CJI + others)
1950 (original)	8 (CJI + 7)
1956 amendment	11 (CJI + 10)
1960 amendment	14 (CJI + 13)
1977 amendment	18 (CJI + 17)
1986 amendment	26 (CJI + 25)
2008 (current)	34 (CJI + 33)

Current Strength: 34 judges total (CJI + 33). As of 2024–25, the SC often operates with vacancies — there is a significant backlog of over 80,000 cases. The SC sits in Benches (Division Bench — 2 judges; Full Bench — 3+; Constitution Bench — 5+).

1.3 Constitution Bench

For cases involving substantial questions of constitutional law — a bench of at least 5 judges (Art. 145(3)).
For cases under Art. 143 (Advisory Jurisdiction) — also 5+ judges.
Larger benches (7, 9, 11, 13 judges) for very important constitutional questions — e.g., Kesavananda Bharati (13 judges).

2. Appointment of Judges — Collegium System (Art. 124(2))

2.1 Constitutional Provision

Art. 124(2): Every judge of the SC shall be appointed by the President by warrant under his hand and seal after consultation with such judges of the SC and HCs as the President may deem necessary. In the case of appointment of a judge other than CJI, the CJI shall always be consulted.

2.2 Evolution — Three Judges Cases

The collegium system is extra-constitutional — it evolved through judicial interpretation, not through any constitutional amendment or legislation.

Case	Year	Key Holding
First Judges Case (S.P. Gupta v. Union of India)	1982	President is NOT bound by the CJI's advice; executive has primacy in judicial appointments; "consultation" does not mean "concurrence."
Second Judges Case (SCAORA v. Union of India)	1993	Overruled First Judges Case. Collegium of CJI + 2 senior-most SC judges; CJI's opinion is primary and binding; "consultation" means "concurrence."
Third Judges Case (Presidential Reference)	1998	Collegium expanded to CJI + 4 senior-most SC judges; majority opinion of collegium prevails; CJI alone cannot recommend.
NJAC Case (Fourth Judges Case)	2015	99th Amendment and NJAC Act struck down as unconstitutional; independence of judiciary is part of basic structure; collegium system restored.

2.3 NJAC — National Judicial Appointments Commission

99th Constitutional Amendment Act, 2014 inserted Art. 124A, 124B, 124C — created the NJAC.
NJAC composition: CJI (Chairperson) + 2 senior-most SC judges + Union Law Minister + 2 eminent persons (selected by committee of PM, CJI, Leader of Opposition).
Struck down in 2015 (Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association v. Union of India) — 4:1 majority held NJAC violates the basic structure doctrine by compromising judicial independence (participation of Law Minister = executive interference).
Justice J.S. Khehar wrote the majority; Justice Chelameswar dissented (would have upheld NJAC).

2.4 Current Collegium Process

Collegium of CJI + 4 senior-most SC judges recommends names for SC appointments and HC Chief Justices.
President may return the recommendation once for reconsideration — but if the collegium reiterates, the President must appoint.
Memorandum of Procedure (MoP) — governs the process; revision has been pending since 2016 (government and collegium disagreement on criteria).

Fig 20.2 — Collegium System: Evolution through Four Judges Cases (1982–2015)

UPSC Trap: The collegium system is NOT mentioned anywhere in the Constitution — it is entirely judge-made law via constitutional interpretation. The NJAC was the only attempt to replace it through constitutional amendment, and it failed. The current process has CJI + 4 (not 2) senior-most judges.

3. Qualifications & Tenure (Art. 124(3))

3.1 Qualifications to be a SC Judge

A person shall not be qualified for appointment as a judge of the SC unless he/she is:

A citizen of India, AND
Has been a judge of an HC (or two or more HCs in succession) for at least 5 years, OR
Has been an advocate of an HC (or two or more HCs in succession) for at least 10 years, OR
Is, in the opinion of the President, a distinguished jurist.

Note: There is no minimum age prescribed for SC judges. The distinguished jurist category has never been used so far — all SC judges have been either former HC judges or senior advocates. No direct appointment from the bar to SC has been made via this route either (though Art. 124(3)(b) allows advocates).

3.2 Tenure

Retirement age: 65 years (HC judges retire at 62).
No minimum tenure specified — appointed "until further order" subject to retirement age.
A judge may resign by writing to the President (Art. 124(2)).
Security of tenure: cannot be removed except by impeachment (Art. 124(4)).

3.3 Oath

Every judge takes an oath before the President (or some person appointed by the President): to bear true faith and allegiance to the Constitution of India, uphold the sovereignty and integrity of India, duly and faithfully perform the duties of the office, and do right to all manner of people without fear or favour, affection or ill-will.

Feature	SC Judge	HC Judge
Retirement age	65 years	62 years
Appointment	President on Collegium recommendation	President on Collegium recommendation (CJI + 2 SC judges)
Oath administered by	President	Governor
Qualifications (judge route)	HC judge for 5 years	District court judge for 10 years
Qualifications (advocate route)	HC advocate for 10 years	HC advocate for 10 years
Post-retirement restriction	Cannot plead/act in any court in India (Art. 124(7))	Cannot plead/act in HC where they served (Art. 220)

4. Removal of SC Judges — Impeachment (Art. 124(4)–(5))

4.1 Grounds

Proved misbehaviour, OR
Incapacity

4.2 Procedure (Judges Enquiry Act, 1968)

Notice/motion signed by minimum 100 LS members or 50 RS members.
Referred to the Speaker/Chairman, who constitutes a 3-member enquiry committee (SC judge + HC Chief Justice + distinguished jurist).
If committee finds proved misbehaviour/incapacity, an address must be passed by each House of Parliament by:
- A majority of total membership of that House, AND
- A majority of not less than 2/3 of members present and voting
Address presented to President — President issues removal order.

Historical record: No SC judge has ever been successfully impeached in India's history.

Justice V. Ramaswami (1993) — Motion passed in Lok Sabha (196 votes for, 0 against — Congress abstained), but failed in Rajya Sabha. Never completed.
Justice Soumitra Sen (RS 2011) — Rajya Sabha passed the motion (189 for, 17 against); resigned before Lok Sabha could vote.
Justice Dipak Misra notice (2018) — Impeachment notice by opposition rejected by Vice President (as RS Chairman).

Key distinction: The impeachment process for SC/HC judges is the same special majority as for the President — majority of total membership + 2/3 of present and voting, in EACH HOUSE. But unlike the President, there is no electoral college — it is purely Parliament. Also, no judicial enquiry is needed for Presidential impeachment.

5. Independence of Judiciary — Constitutional Safeguards

Security of Tenure

Judges can only be removed by impeachment — a complex, rarely-attempted process. They cannot be removed by executive order or for their judicial decisions.

Salaries from Consolidated Fund

Salaries, allowances, and pensions of SC judges are charged to the Consolidated Fund of India (Art. 112(3)(d)) — NOT voted/passed by Parliament. This prevents Parliament from using budget to pressure judges.

Conduct Not Discussed in Parliament

Art. 121: The conduct of SC/HC judges in the discharge of their duties cannot be discussed in either House of Parliament except on a motion for their removal. This prevents parliamentary intimidation.

Power to Punish for Contempt

Art. 129: SC is a Court of Record and has power to punish for contempt of itself. This protects its authority and dignity from being undermined.

Bar on Practice After Retirement

Art. 124(7): A retired SC judge cannot plead or act in any court or before any authority in India. This prevents judges from building lucrative post-retirement practice that might compromise objectivity while in office.

Collegium Appointments

Appointments by the collegium (not the government) — evolved through judicial interpretation to ensure judiciary controls its own appointments, preventing executive packing of courts.

Art. 50 (DPSP): Separation of judiciary from the executive — the State shall take steps to separate the judiciary from the executive in public services. This is a directive principle, not enforceable, but guides policy.

6. Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court — Overview

Fig 20.1 — Supreme Court: Five types of jurisdiction with key articles and features

7. Original Jurisdiction (Art. 131)

7.1 Scope

Art. 131 gives the SC exclusive original jurisdiction — meaning ONLY the SC can hear these disputes, and no other court can. This jurisdiction covers disputes between:

The Government of India vs one or more States
The Government of India + one or more States vs one or more other States
Two or more States inter se (between themselves)

Importantly, the dispute must involve a question of law or fact on which the existence or extent of a legal right depends — not a political question.

7.2 What is EXCLUDED from Art. 131

Disputes arising from pre-Constitution treaties or agreements with princely states.
Disputes about elections (governed by Election Commission and HC/SC appellate jurisdiction).
Inter-state river disputes — Parliament can by law (Art. 262) exclude SC from adjudicating; the Inter-State Water Disputes Act 1956 sets up Tribunals, whose decisions are final and cannot be questioned in SC.
Disputes between private parties and a State government — these go through ordinary civil/writ courts.

UPSC Trap: Art. 131 original jurisdiction is EXCLUSIVE — it excludes HC jurisdiction for Centre-State disputes. But private citizens CANNOT invoke Art. 131 — only governmental entities (Centre/States). For FR violations by the State, a private citizen uses Art. 32 (writ jurisdiction), not Art. 131.

8. Writ Jurisdiction (Art. 32) — "Heart and Soul"

8.1 Art. 32 — Right to Constitutional Remedies

Art. 32 gives every person the right to move the Supreme Court for enforcement of Fundamental Rights. This is itself a Fundamental Right under Part III — making it non-derogable (cannot be suspended ordinarily).

8.2 The Five Writs

Writ	Meaning	Use
Habeas Corpus	"You have the body"	Against illegal detention; compels authority to produce the detained person before court
Mandamus	"We command"	Against public authority that fails to perform a public duty; not against President/Governor or private individual
Prohibition	"Forbidden"	Issued to inferior courts to stop proceedings that exceed jurisdiction; only against judicial/quasi-judicial bodies
Certiorari	"To be certified"	Quashes order of inferior court/tribunal that acted beyond jurisdiction or violated natural justice
Quo Warranto	"By what authority?"	Challenges a person's claim to hold a public office; available to any interested person, not just aggrieved party

8.3 Art. 32 vs Art. 226 — A Critical Comparison

Fig 20.3 — Art. 32 vs Art. 226: Key differences in writ jurisdiction between SC and HC

Suspension of Art. 32: During a National Emergency (Art. 352), enforcement of Art. 19 FRs is automatically suspended. Art. 32 can also be suspended under Art. 359 by Presidential proclamation — but Art. 20 and Art. 21 CANNOT be suspended even during Emergency (44th Amendment, 1978).

9. Appellate Jurisdiction (Arts. 132–134, 136)

9.1 Constitutional Matters (Art. 132)

Appeal lies to SC from any HC judgment, decree, or final order if the HC certifies under Art. 134A that the case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution.
Applies to civil, criminal, and other proceedings — unlike the civil/criminal-specific Arts. 133 and 134.

9.2 Civil Matters (Art. 133)

Appeal from HC in civil cases — requires HC certificate that the case involves a substantial question of law of general importance and that question needs to be decided by SC.
HC must certify under Art. 134A.

9.3 Criminal Matters (Art. 134)

SC has appellate jurisdiction in criminal cases in the following: where HC has reversed an acquittal and sentenced the person to death; where HC has withdrawn a case from subordinate court and convicted and sentenced to death; where HC certifies it is fit for SC appeal.

9.4 Special Leave Petition — Art. 136 (The Most Important!)

Art. 136 is the widest and most discretionary appellate jurisdiction of the SC — and the most practically important. It allows SC to grant special leave to appeal from:

Any judgment, decree, determination, sentence, or order
In any cause or matter
Passed or made by any court or tribunal in India

Exception: Art. 136 does NOT apply to court-martials (military tribunals under Armed Forces Acts).

Key points on SLP (Art. 136):

It is a discretionary jurisdiction — SC is not bound to grant SLP; it only intervenes when there is a serious legal issue or gross injustice.
SLP can be filed against orders of any court or tribunal — not just HCs; includes NGT, SEBI Appellate Tribunal, Service Tribunals, etc.
SLP is NOT available against military/court-martial proceedings.
Over 80% of SC's docket comes via Art. 136 SLPs — making it the primary gateway to the SC in practice.
If SC grants leave, SLP converts into a regular appeal.

Type	Article	From Where	Certificate Required?
Constitutional appeals	Art. 132	Any HC judgment	Yes — HC certificate (Art. 134A)
Civil appeals	Art. 133	HC in civil cases	Yes — HC certificate (Art. 134A)
Criminal appeals	Art. 134	HC in criminal cases	Some as of right, some by certificate
Special Leave Petition	Art. 136	ANY court/tribunal	No — discretion of SC

10. Advisory Jurisdiction (Art. 143)

10.1 Nature

Under Art. 143, the President may refer to the SC any question of law or fact of public importance for its opinion.
SC may report its opinion — but the opinion is NOT binding on the President (unlike the regular judicial decisions under Art. 141).
SC has the discretion to decline to give an opinion — it need not answer.
The SC's advisory opinion is NOT a "judgment" and does not create binding precedent under Art. 141.

10.2 Advisory Jurisdiction vs Judicial Review

Feature	Advisory (Art. 143)	Judicial Review (regular cases)
Initiation	By President (reference)	By aggrieved party (petition)
Binding?	NOT binding on President	Binding under Art. 141
Bench	5+ judges (Constitution Bench)	Varies (2 to 13 judges)
SC can decline?	Yes — discretion to refuse	No — must hear if jurisdiction exists

10.3 Notable Presidential References (Art. 143)

Reference	Year	Outcome
Delhi Laws Act Case	1951	SC gave opinion on legislative delegation
Kerala Education Bill	1957	SC gave opinion on Art. 30 minority rights
Berubari Union Case	1960	SC opined — territory cession requires constitutional amendment
Ram Janmabhoomi Reference	1993	SC declined to give opinion — reference was politically motivated
SAIL Reference	1996	On scope of Art. 12 (definition of State)

Art. 143(2): A separate provision allows the President to refer matters relating to pre-Constitution treaties, agreements, engagements — but SC must give its opinion on such references (it cannot decline, unlike under Art. 143(1)).

11. Other Constitutional Powers of the Supreme Court

11.1 Art. 139 — Parliament Can Confer Further Jurisdiction

Parliament may by law confer on the SC further original jurisdiction in respect of matters in the Union List. This has been used to extend SC's jurisdiction, e.g., under the Consumer Protection Act (SC can hear certain appeals).

11.2 Art. 139A — Transfer of Cases

If the same or substantially the same question of law is pending before two or more HCs, or before SC and one or more HCs, the SC may — on its own motion or on application — transfer and consolidate such cases.
Also allows SC to transfer a case from any HC to itself if it is just and expedient to do so.

11.3 Art. 141 — Binding Precedent

Law declared by the Supreme Court shall be binding on all courts within the territory of India. This makes SC decisions the supreme source of judge-made law — all HCs, district courts, tribunals, and other courts must follow SC precedents.

Note: Art. 141 binds courts, not the SC itself — the SC can overrule its own earlier decisions. A larger bench can overrule a smaller bench (hence 5-judge benches can overrule 3-judge bench decisions, etc.).

11.4 Art. 142 — Complete Justice

The SC may pass such decree or make such order as is necessary for doing complete justice in any cause or matter pending before it. Such order shall be enforceable throughout India.

This is the SC's most extraordinary power — allows it to go beyond existing law to achieve justice.
Used in: Bhopal Gas Tragedy case (ordered settlement), Taj Mahal pollution case (ordered closure of industries), electoral reforms, ordering elections/investigations, dissolving political parties.
Described as "the fount of justice" — provides constitutional legitimacy to activist orders.

11.5 Art. 144 — Authorities to Act in Aid of SC

All civil and judicial authorities throughout the territory of India shall act in aid of the Supreme Court. This ensures SC orders are enforceable — no authority can refuse to comply with SC directions.

11.6 Art. 145 — Rules of the SC

The SC may make rules for regulating generally its practice and procedure, with the approval of the President. These include rules about the sitting of benches, conditions of appeals, etc.

Article	Provision (Key Words)
Art. 129	SC is a Court of Record; power to punish for contempt
Art. 130	Seat of SC — Delhi; CJI can fix other places with President's approval
Art. 131	Original jurisdiction — Centre-State disputes (exclusive)
Art. 132	Appellate — constitutional questions (HC certificate)
Art. 133	Appellate — civil matters (HC certificate)
Art. 134	Appellate — criminal matters
Art. 134A	Certificate by HC for SC appeal (inserted by 44th Amdt 1978)
Art. 135	Federal Court jurisdiction — SC now exercises such jurisdiction
Art. 136	Special Leave Petition — any court/tribunal (discretionary)
Art. 137	Review jurisdiction — SC can review its own judgments
Art. 138	Enlargement of SC jurisdiction by Parliament (Union List matters)
Art. 139	SC further original jurisdiction — Parliament can confer
Art. 139A	Transfer of cases from HCs to SC
Art. 140	Ancillary powers of SC
Art. 141	Law declared by SC binding on all courts
Art. 142	Complete justice — SC can pass any order/decree needed
Art. 143	Advisory jurisdiction — Presidential reference
Art. 144	All authorities shall act in aid of SC
Art. 145	Rules of SC (with President's approval)
Art. 146	Officers/servants of SC — appointed by CJI
Art. 147	Interpretation of this Chapter and Part III

12. Court of Record (Art. 129)

12.1 What is a Court of Record?

A Court of Record is a court whose proceedings are recorded for perpetual memory and testimony. Its records are admitted as evidence and are not questioned in any court. The SC's records have evidentiary value and cannot be impeached.

12.2 Contempt of Court

As a Court of Record, the SC can punish for contempt of itself. The Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 governs the law of contempt in India.

Type of Contempt	Definition	Punishment
Civil Contempt	Wilful disobedience of any judgment, decree, direction, order, writ, or process of the court, or wilful breach of undertaking given to the court	Fine up to Rs. 2,000 and/or simple imprisonment up to 6 months
Criminal Contempt	Publication that scandalises or lowers authority of court, prejudices judicial proceedings, or interferes with administration of justice	Fine up to Rs. 2,000 and/or simple imprisonment up to 6 months

Innocent publication defence: Under Contempt of Courts Act 1971 (as amended in 2006), truth is a valid defence if publication was in public interest and for public benefit. This amendment was largely due to Arundhati Roy contempt case and media pressure for reform.

13. Supreme Court as Guardian of the Constitution

13.1 Judicial Review

The SC has the power to review legislation and executive actions to examine their constitutional validity. While the Constitution does not explicitly use the term "judicial review," it is implied in Art. 13 (laws inconsistent with FRs are void), Art. 32, Art. 131, Art. 136, and Art. 226.

Art. 13(1): Pre-Constitutional laws inconsistent with FRs are void to the extent of inconsistency.
Art. 13(2): State shall not make any law that takes away or abridges FRs — such law shall be void.
Judicial review extends to both legislative and executive actions — an executive order violating FRs or constitutional provisions is struck down.

13.2 Basic Structure Doctrine

Evolved from Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973) — 13-judge bench; held Parliament can amend any part of the Constitution but cannot destroy the "basic structure."
What constitutes basic structure: supremacy of Constitution, democratic republic, secular character, federal character, separation of powers, free and fair elections, judicial review, independence of judiciary, Art. 32, unity and integrity of India, etc.
The SC acts as the ultimate arbiter of what constitutes basic structure — giving it immense power over constitutional amendments.

13.3 Keeper of Fundamental Rights

Art. 32 makes SC the principal enforcer of FRs — any person can approach the SC directly when their FRs are violated.
SC has used Public Interest Litigation (PIL) — a judge-made innovation — to expand access to justice for weaker sections who cannot individually approach court.
Hussainara Khatoon case (1979) — first PIL; SC suo motu took cognisance of undertrial prisoners' plight.

13.4 Public Interest Litigation (PIL)

Not mentioned in Constitution — entirely judge-made innovation.
Allows any public-spirited person (even a third party) to move SC under Art. 32 or HC under Art. 226 for enforcement of rights of disadvantaged groups.
Relaxes the traditional "locus standi" (standing) requirement — petitioner need not be personally aggrieved.
Key PIL cases: Bandhua Mukti Morcha (bonded labour), Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan (sexual harassment guidelines), MC Mehta cases (environment), Right to food case (mid-day meal scheme).

14. Key Recent Developments (2022–2025)

14.1 NJAC and Collegium Reform

NJAC struck down in 2015 — collegium system restored. However, debate about transparency continues.
SC (2022) directed the government to act on collegium recommendations — government's delayed action on judicial appointments led to public clash between SC and Union government.
Memorandum of Procedure (MoP) revision remains pending — both government and collegium disagree on the criteria for "national security" veto by government.

14.2 Electoral Bonds Case (2024)

Association for Democratic Reforms v. Union of India (Feb 2024) — 5-judge Constitution Bench struck down the Electoral Bonds Scheme 2018 unanimously.
Held: Electoral bonds violated voters' right to information (Art. 19(1)(a)) about political funding; the scheme allowed anonymous corporate donations to ruling parties — violating democracy.
Directed SBI to hand over bond purchase data to Election Commission; ECI to publish on its website.
Significant exercise of Art. 32 and Art. 142 powers.

14.3 Article 370 Abrogation Case (Dec 2023)

SC (5-judge bench) unanimously upheld the abrogation of Art. 370 in August 2019.
Held: President's power under Art. 370 was not limited by the dissolution of J&K Constituent Assembly; Parliament acting as J&K legislature was valid; Art. 370 was a temporary provision.
Directed: Elections in J&K to be held by September 2024; statehood to be restored.

14.4 Maharashtra Political Crisis — Subhash Desai v. Principal Secretary (2023)

SC (5-judge Constitution Bench) examined the Uddhav Thackeray vs Eknath Shinde factions.
Held: Governor's action in directing floor test was wrong; disqualification petitions should be decided by Speaker; SC referred the Speaker's inaction to the Speaker to decide.
Important for anti-defection law (10th Schedule) and role of Speaker.

14.5 PMLA Provisions — Vijay Madanlal Choudhary (2022)

SC upheld the wide powers of the ED under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) — arrest without copy of ECIR (Enforcement Case Information Report), reverse burden of proof, bail conditions.
Controversial — critics said SC upheld provisions that depart from ordinary criminal law principles.

Curative Petition (Art. 137): After a review petition is dismissed, a party may file a curative petition before the SC — available only in rare cases involving gross miscarriage of justice (Rupa Hurra v. Ashok Hurra, 2002). This is the last judicial remedy available in India.

15. Prelims PYQs

Prelims 2023

With reference to the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of India, which of the following is correct about Art. 136 (Special Leave Petition)?
Answer: SC can grant SLP to appeal from ANY court or tribunal in India except military tribunals/courts-martial — Art. 136 is the widest and most discretionary appellate jurisdiction; no certificate from lower court needed; SC has absolute discretion.

Prelims 2022

Consider: (1) Art. 141 — Law declared by SC binding on all courts. (2) Art. 142 — SC can pass any decree necessary for complete justice. Which is/are correct?
Answer: Both (1) and (2) — Art. 141 creates binding precedent; Art. 142 is the "complete justice" extraordinary power. Both are correct statements.

Prelims 2021

What is the nature of the collegium system for appointing SC judges?
Answer: The collegium system is extra-constitutional — it evolved through judicial interpretation in the Three Judges Cases (1982, 1993, 1998); it is NOT mentioned in the Constitution; the current collegium consists of CJI + 4 senior-most SC judges.

Prelims 2020

With reference to Art. 131 (Original Jurisdiction), which of the following disputes CANNOT be heard by the SC?
Answer: Inter-state river water disputes — Parliament has excluded SC jurisdiction under Art. 262 via the Inter-State Water Disputes Act 1956; also excluded: disputes from pre-Constitution treaties, election disputes.

Prelims 2019

Which Article empowers the President of India to refer a question of law or fact of public importance to the Supreme Court for its opinion?
Answer: Article 143 — Advisory jurisdiction; the opinion rendered is NOT binding on the President; SC can decline to give opinion under Art. 143(1) but cannot decline under Art. 143(2) (pre-Constitutional treaties).

Prelims 2018

What is the difference between Art. 32 and Art. 226?
Answer: Art. 32 (SC) — only FRs; itself a FR; cannot be suspended ordinarily; no discretion to refuse if FR is violated. Art. 226 (HC) — any right (FR + legal); NOT a FR; HC has discretion; can be suspended. Both can issue all 5 writs.

Prelims 2017

Under which Article can the Supreme Court review its own judgment?
Answer: Article 137 — Review jurisdiction; SC can review any judgment or order made by it; the review petition must be filed within 30 days; grounds: error apparent on face of record, new evidence, or any other sufficient reason.

Prelims 2016

With reference to the removal of a Supreme Court judge, which of the following statements is correct?
Answer: Removal requires a special majority — majority of total membership of each House AND 2/3 of members present and voting — in BOTH Houses; grounds are proved misbehaviour or incapacity; no SC judge has ever been successfully impeached in India's history.

Prelims 2015

Who described Article 32 as the "heart and soul of the Constitution"?
Answer: Dr B.R. Ambedkar — in the Constituent Assembly debates, he stated Art. 32 is the "most important article...without which the Constitution would be a nullity...the very soul of the Constitution and the very heart of it."

16. Mains PYQs

Mains GS-II 2023

The collegium system of judicial appointments has been criticised for its opacity and lack of accountability. Discuss with reference to the NJAC judgment. (250 words)

Hint: Collegium = extra-constitutional, evolved through Three Judges Cases; NJAC struck down 2015 — independence of judiciary = basic structure; critique of collegium: opacity, nepotism allegations, no written criteria; reforms needed: transparent MoP, published reasons for appointments/rejections (SC started publishing collegium resolutions from 2022); SC vs Executive tension on delayed appointments; comparison with UK (JAC) and USA (Senate confirmation); way forward — transparent process within judicial primacy.

Mains GS-II 2022

Judicial activism and judicial overreach — where should the line be drawn? Examine with reference to Art. 142. (250 words)

Hint: Art. 142 = "complete justice" — used in Bhopal gas case settlement, Taj Mahal case, ordering elections, dissolving parties; judicial activism = positive (Vishaka guidelines, mid-day meals, bonded labour); overreach = encroaches on executive/legislative domain; separation of powers concern; line should be: SC can fill vacuum but not replace policy; PIL vs PILL (Public Interest Litigation vs Private Interest Litigation); recent curbing of frivolous PILs; need for judicial restraint in policy areas.

Mains GS-II 2021

"The Supreme Court is not merely a court of law but the conscience of the nation." Critically examine this statement. (150 words)

Hint: SC as guardian of Constitution (Art. 32, Art. 141); original jurisdiction (Art. 131 — federal court); advisory (Art. 143); complete justice (Art. 142); PIL innovation for disadvantaged; basic structure doctrine (Kesavananda Bharati); critique — counter-majoritarian concern (unelected judges vs elected Parliament); judicial delays (80,000+ pending cases in SC); but SC's role in Emergency (ADM Jabalpur — wrong; Maneka Gandhi — correcting it); Electoral Bonds 2024; Art. 370 case; SC as last resort.

Mains GS-II 2020

Examine the scope and significance of the advisory jurisdiction of the Supreme Court under Art. 143. (150 words)

Hint: Art. 143(1) — President may refer; SC may refuse (discretionary); Art. 143(2) — pre-Constitutional treaties — SC MUST give opinion; opinion NOT binding on President; differs from regular jurisdiction (Art. 141 not applicable); 5-judge bench required; notable references: Delhi Laws Act 1951, Kerala Education Bill 1957, Berubari 1960, Ram Janmabhoomi 1993 (SC declined); significance — allows President to get SC guidance on politically sensitive legal questions without full litigation.

Mains GS-II Expected 2026

Critically examine the Supreme Court's role in protecting Fundamental Rights through Article 32. How does this compare with High Courts' power under Article 226? (250 words)

Hint: Art. 32 = FR itself (not just procedural right); Ambedkar's "heart and soul"; 5 writs under Art. 32; SC cannot refuse if FR is violated; Art. 226 = wider (any right) but discretionary; HC can refuse on laches, alternative remedy; both can issue all 5 writs; Art. 32 applies throughout India, Art. 226 has territorial limits; PIL via Art. 32 expanded access (Hussainara Khatoon, Bandhua Mukti Morcha, Vishaka); suspension: Art. 32 can be suspended under Art. 359 (except Arts. 20, 21); Art. 226 more difficult to suspend; argument for using HC first to reduce SC burden (SC has recommended this); but Art. 32 remains supreme remedy.

Mains GS-II Expected 2026

Discuss the independence of the judiciary as a basic structure element. What safeguards does the Constitution provide for judicial independence? (150 words)

Hint: Independence of judiciary = basic structure (NJAC case 2015, Kesavananda Bharati 1973, Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain 1975); constitutional safeguards: security of tenure (impeachment only), salaries from CFI (Art. 112(3)), no discussion of conduct in Parliament (Art. 121), contempt power (Art. 129), bar on post-retirement practice (Art. 124(7)); collegium system as safeguard against executive packing; separation of judiciary from executive (Art. 50 DPSP); critique — delayed appointments, executive pressure on collegium, post-retirement appointments of judges as governors/tribunals; way forward: transparent MoP, fixed post-retirement cooling-off period.

17. 15-Minute Revision Box

Must-Remember — Supreme Court of India

Key Articles:

Art. 124 — Constitution, composition, appointment, removal
Art. 129 — Court of Record; contempt power
Art. 131 — Original jurisdiction (exclusive; Centre-State)
Art. 132 — Constitutional appeals from HC
Art. 136 — SLP (widest; discretionary; not military)
Art. 141 — SC law binding on ALL courts
Art. 142 — Complete justice (extraordinary power)
Art. 143 — Advisory jurisdiction (Presidential reference)
Art. 32 — Writ jurisdiction; FR enforcement; "heart & soul"
Art. 226 — HC writ jurisdiction (wider; any right)

Collegium Evolution:

1982: First Judges Case — executive primacy
1993: Second Judges Case — CJI+2; judiciary primacy
1998: Third Judges Case — CJI+4 (current)
2014: NJAC (99th Amendment)
2015: NJAC struck down — independence = basic structure

Jurisdiction Quick Summary:

Original (Art. 131) — Exclusive; Centre-State; excludes rivers, elections, pre-Constitution treaties
Writ (Art. 32) — Only FRs; itself a FR; cannot refuse if FR violated
Appellate (132–134) — From HCs; needs certificate (except Art. 134 criminal)
SLP (Art. 136) — Any court/tribunal; most used; discretionary; NO military
Advisory (Art. 143) — Presidential reference; NOT binding; SC can decline

Key Facts:

Current strength: 34 judges (CJI + 33)
Retirement: 65 years (HC: 62)
Seat: Delhi (Art. 130)
Established: 26 Jan 1950 (replaced Federal Court 1937)
No successful impeachment in history
Art. 226 HC: wider scope; Art. 32 SC: supreme but narrower

4 UPSC traps: (1) Collegium is NOT in the Constitution — extra-constitutional, judge-made. (2) Art. 131 original jurisdiction EXCLUDES inter-state river disputes (Art. 262 excludes SC). (3) Art. 143 advisory opinion is NOT binding on President. (4) Art. 32 is itself a FR; Art. 226 is NOT a FR — HC can refuse; SC cannot if FR is violated.

Item	Detail
Established	26 Jan 1950
Replaced	Federal Court (1937)
Seat	Delhi (Art. 130)
Strength (current)	34 (CJI + 33)
Retirement age	65 years
Collegium	CJI + 4 senior-most SC judges
Constitution Bench	5+ judges (Art. 145(3))
Advisory opinion	NOT binding (Art. 143)
SLP applicable to	Any court except military

Type	Article
Original	Art. 131
Writ	Art. 32
Appellate (const.)	Art. 132
SLP	Art. 136
Advisory	Art. 143

Supreme Court of India

On this page

Conceptual Clarity — Apex Court & Constitutional Guardian

1. Constitution & Composition (Art. 124)

1.1 Establishment

1.2 Composition — Strength Over Time

1.3 Constitution Bench

2. Appointment of Judges — Collegium System (Art. 124(2))

2.1 Constitutional Provision

2.2 Evolution — Three Judges Cases

2.3 NJAC — National Judicial Appointments Commission

2.4 Current Collegium Process

3. Qualifications & Tenure (Art. 124(3))

3.1 Qualifications to be a SC Judge

3.2 Tenure

3.3 Oath

4. Removal of SC Judges — Impeachment (Art. 124(4)–(5))

4.1 Grounds

4.2 Procedure (Judges Enquiry Act, 1968)

5. Independence of Judiciary — Constitutional Safeguards

Security of Tenure

Salaries from Consolidated Fund

Conduct Not Discussed in Parliament

Power to Punish for Contempt

Bar on Practice After Retirement

Collegium Appointments

6. Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court — Overview

7. Original Jurisdiction (Art. 131)

7.1 Scope

7.2 What is EXCLUDED from Art. 131

8. Writ Jurisdiction (Art. 32) — "Heart and Soul"

8.1 Art. 32 — Right to Constitutional Remedies

8.2 The Five Writs

8.3 Art. 32 vs Art. 226 — A Critical Comparison

9. Appellate Jurisdiction (Arts. 132–134, 136)

9.1 Constitutional Matters (Art. 132)

9.2 Civil Matters (Art. 133)

9.3 Criminal Matters (Art. 134)

9.4 Special Leave Petition — Art. 136 (The Most Important!)

10. Advisory Jurisdiction (Art. 143)

10.1 Nature

10.2 Advisory Jurisdiction vs Judicial Review

10.3 Notable Presidential References (Art. 143)

11. Other Constitutional Powers of the Supreme Court

11.1 Art. 139 — Parliament Can Confer Further Jurisdiction

11.2 Art. 139A — Transfer of Cases

11.3 Art. 141 — Binding Precedent

11.4 Art. 142 — Complete Justice

11.5 Art. 144 — Authorities to Act in Aid of SC

11.6 Art. 145 — Rules of the SC

12. Court of Record (Art. 129)

12.1 What is a Court of Record?

12.2 Contempt of Court

13. Supreme Court as Guardian of the Constitution

13.1 Judicial Review

13.2 Basic Structure Doctrine

13.3 Keeper of Fundamental Rights

13.4 Public Interest Litigation (PIL)

14. Key Recent Developments (2022–2025)

14.1 NJAC and Collegium Reform

14.2 Electoral Bonds Case (2024)

14.3 Article 370 Abrogation Case (Dec 2023)

14.4 Maharashtra Political Crisis — Subhash Desai v. Principal Secretary (2023)

14.5 PMLA Provisions — Vijay Madanlal Choudhary (2022)

15. Prelims PYQs

16. Mains PYQs

17. 15-Minute Revision Box

Must-Remember — Supreme Court of India