Supreme Court of India
A comprehensive self-learning guide to the composition, appointments, independence, jurisdiction, writs, judicial review, landmark judgments and contemporary issues concerning India’s highest court.
Concepts • Constitutional Articles • Interactive Knowledge Checks • Case Studies • 25 Prelims MCQs • Mains Practice
Introduction: India’s Apex Court
The Supreme Court of India is the highest judicial institution in the country. It protects the Constitution, enforces Fundamental Rights, resolves specified federal disputes and acts as the final court of appeal.
It was inaugurated on 28 January 1950.
Historical Background
- The Federal Court of India was established in 1937 under the Government of India Act, 1935.
- The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council had served as a major final appellate authority.
- The Supreme Court succeeded the Federal Court under the Constitution of India.
Integrated Judicial System
India has a single integrated judicial hierarchy that administers Union and State laws.
Knowledge Check 1. When was the Supreme Court of India inaugurated?
Constitutional Position and Composition
Part V, Chapter IV of the Constitution contains provisions relating to the Supreme Court, principally Articles 124–147.
Composition under Article 124
The Supreme Court consists of the Chief Justice of India and such number of other judges as Parliament prescribes by law.
The Court originally had eight judges, including the Chief Justice. Its sanctioned strength was subsequently increased.
Seat of the Court
Under Article 130, the Court sits in Delhi or at another place appointed by the Chief Justice of India with the President’s approval.
Important Articles
| Article | Subject |
|---|---|
| 124 | Establishment and constitution |
| 125 | Salaries and conditions of judges |
| 126 | Acting Chief Justice |
| 127 | Ad hoc judges |
| 128 | Attendance of retired judges |
| 129 | Court of Record |
| 130 | Seat of the Supreme Court |
| 131 | Original jurisdiction |
| 132–134 | Appeals |
| 136 | Special leave to appeal |
| 137 | Review jurisdiction |
| 139A | Transfer of certain cases |
| 141 | Binding precedent |
| 142 | Complete justice |
| 143 | Advisory jurisdiction |
| 144 | Authorities to aid the Court |
| 145 | Court rules and Constitution Benches |
Knowledge Check 2. Which Article establishes the Supreme Court?
Appointment of Supreme Court Judges
Judges are formally appointed by the President of India under Article 124.
The constitutional text provides for consultation, while judicial decisions have developed the collegium-based process.
Evolution of the Collegium
Supreme Court Collegium
For appointments to the Supreme Court, the collegium comprises the Chief Justice of India and the four senior-most judges of the Supreme Court.
Appointment of Chief Justice
The established convention is to appoint the senior-most eligible judge as Chief Justice of India through the constitutional process.
Knowledge Check 3. Who formally appoints Supreme Court judges?
Knowledge Check 4. Which case invalidated the NJAC framework?
Qualifications, Oath and Conditions of Service
Qualifications — Article 124(3)
A candidate must be an Indian citizen and meet at least one of these conditions:
- At least five years as a judge of a High Court or successive High Courts.
- At least ten years as an advocate of a High Court or successive High Courts.
- A distinguished jurist in the President’s opinion.
Oath
The judge swears to bear true faith and allegiance to the Constitution, uphold India’s sovereignty and integrity, and discharge judicial duties without fear, favour, affection or ill-will.
Tenure
- Retirement age: 65 years.
- Resignation is addressed to the President.
- Judges do not serve at the pleasure of the executive.
Post-Retirement Restriction
A retired Supreme Court judge cannot plead or act before any court or authority within the territory of India.
Knowledge Check 5. At what age does a Supreme Court judge retire?
Knowledge Check 6. Which is a constitutional qualification for appointment to the Supreme Court?
Removal of Supreme Court Judges
Article 124(4) permits removal only on the grounds of:
- Proved misbehaviour
- Incapacity
Required Special Majority
Each House of Parliament must pass the address by both:
- A majority of the total membership of that House; and
- At least two-thirds of members present and voting.
Procedure
Inquiry Committee
- A Supreme Court judge or the Chief Justice of India.
- A Chief Justice of a High Court.
- A distinguished jurist.
Knowledge Check 7. What are the constitutional grounds for removal?
Knowledge Check 8. Who issues the final removal order?
Independence of the Supreme Court
Judicial independence ensures that courts decide cases according to the Constitution and law without improper political or institutional pressure.
Article 121
Parliamentary discussion of the conduct of Supreme Court and High Court judges in the discharge of their duties is restricted, except in connection with the specified removal procedure.
Knowledge Check 9. Which provision helps prevent ordinary executive removal of judges?
Jurisdiction and Powers
Jurisdiction is the legal authority of a court to hear and decide cases.
| Type | Article | Function |
|---|---|---|
| Original | 131 | Specified federal disputes |
| Writ | 32 | Fundamental Rights |
| Appellate | 132–134 | Constitutional, civil and criminal appeals |
| Special Leave | 136 | Discretionary appeals |
| Advisory | 143 | Presidential references |
| Review | 137 | Review of judgments |
| Complete Justice | 142 | Necessary orders in pending matters |
Original Jurisdiction — Article 131
The Supreme Court has exclusive original jurisdiction over qualifying disputes:
- Between the Union and one or more States.
- Between the Union and States on one side and other States on the other.
- Between two or more States.
The dispute must involve a question of law or fact on which the existence or extent of a legal right depends.
Knowledge Check 10. Which Article provides exclusive original jurisdiction over specified federal disputes?
Writ Jurisdiction and Fundamental Rights
Article 32 guarantees the right to move the Supreme Court for enforcement of Fundamental Rights.
The Five Writs
Article 32 vs Article 226
| Feature | Article 32 | Article 226 |
|---|---|---|
| Court | Supreme Court | High Courts |
| Scope | Fundamental Rights | Fundamental Rights and other purposes |
| Status | Itself a Fundamental Right | Constitutional power |
| Subject-matter | Narrower | Wider |
Knowledge Check 11. Which writ primarily addresses unlawful detention?
Knowledge Check 12. Which statement is correct?
Appellate and Special Leave Jurisdiction
Article 132 — Constitutional Appeals
Provides for appeals involving substantial questions of law concerning interpretation of the Constitution, subject to applicable certification requirements.
Article 133 — Civil Appeals
Concerns certified civil appeals involving substantial questions of law of general importance requiring determination by the Supreme Court.
Article 134 — Criminal Appeals
Provides specified routes of appeal in criminal cases.
Article 136 — Special Leave
The Supreme Court may grant discretionary special leave to appeal against decisions of courts and tribunals, subject to constitutional exclusions.
Knowledge Check 13. Which Article deals with special leave to appeal?
Advisory, Review and Other Powers
Article 143 — Advisory Jurisdiction
The President may refer specified questions to the Supreme Court for its opinion. Under Article 143(1), the Court may decline to answer a reference.
Article 129 — Court of Record
The Supreme Court is a Court of Record and possesses contempt jurisdiction.
Article 137 — Review
The Court may review its judgments and orders subject to applicable rules and legal requirements.
Curative Petitions
An exceptional judicially developed remedy available on limited grounds after dismissal of review.
Article 142 — Complete Justice
Empowers the Court to make necessary orders for complete justice in causes or matters pending before it.
Article 141 — Binding Precedent
The law declared by the Supreme Court is binding on all courts in India.
Article 144 — Aid to the Court
Civil and judicial authorities throughout India must act in aid of the Supreme Court.
Article 145(3) — Constitution Bench
At least five judges are required for cases involving a substantial question of law concerning constitutional interpretation and certain advisory references.
Knowledge Check 14. Which Article provides advisory jurisdiction?
Knowledge Check 15. Which Article makes Supreme Court law binding on all courts in India?
Judicial Review, Activism and PIL
Judicial Review
The power to examine the constitutionality of legislation and executive action, and invalidate measures inconsistent with the Constitution.
Judicial Activism
An assertive judicial approach to constitutional issues, rights violations and governance failures.
Public Interest Litigation
PIL allows suitable public-interest matters to reach courts through more flexible standing requirements.
Judicial Restraint
Respect for institutional boundaries and democratically accountable policy-making.
Judicial Overreach
A criticism applied where judicial intervention is considered to extend beyond proper constitutional functions.
Knowledge Check 16. Judicial review principally concerns:
Landmark Supreme Court Judgments
| Case | Year | Principle |
|---|---|---|
| Golaknath | 1967 | Evolution of amendment doctrine |
| Kesavananda Bharati | 1973 | Basic Structure |
| Indira Nehru Gandhi v. Raj Narain | 1975 | Free and fair elections |
| Maneka Gandhi | 1978 | Fair procedure and Article 21 |
| Minerva Mills | 1980 | Limited amending power |
| S. P. Gupta | 1981 | First Judges Case |
| S. R. Bommai | 1994 | Federalism and secularism |
| Vishaka | 1997 | Workplace harassment safeguards |
| I. R. Coelho | 2007 | Ninth Schedule and Basic Structure |
| NJAC Judgment | 2015 | Judicial appointments |
| K. S. Puttaswamy | 2017 | Privacy as Fundamental Right |
| Navtej Singh Johar | 2018 | Equality and dignity |
| Electoral Bonds Judgment | 2024 | Political funding transparency |
Three Essential Cases
Knowledge Check 17. Which case established the Basic Structure doctrine?
Contemporary Challenges and Reforms
1. Pendency and Delays
Large caseloads, procedural complexity and capacity limitations affect timely justice.
2. Appointment Process
Debates concern transparency, appointment delays, judicial primacy and accountability.
3. Access to Justice
Legal costs, language barriers, distance and unequal representation affect litigants.
4. Diversity
Representation across gender, social backgrounds and professional experience remains important.
5. Judicial Accountability
Judicial independence must coexist with institutional integrity, transparency and public confidence.
6. Technology
E-filing, virtual hearings and digital case management can improve accessibility while creating challenges of digital exclusion and privacy.
10 Constitutional Case Studies
Case 1. A person is detained unlawfully. Which writ is appropriate?
Case 2. A statutory authority refuses to perform a mandatory public duty.
Case 3. Two States dispute the extent of a legal right under the federal framework.
Case 4. The President seeks the Court’s opinion on a question of public importance.
Case 5. A litigant seeks exceptional permission to appeal a tribunal decision.
Case 6. Parliament enacts a law violating a Fundamental Right.
Case 7. An inferior court proceeds beyond its jurisdiction.
Case 8. A person occupies a public office without satisfying legal eligibility requirements.
Case 9. A litigant seeks review of a Supreme Court judgment on recognised legal grounds.
Case 10. A matter requires a Constitution Bench under Article 145(3).
Final Test — 25 MCQs
Select an answer to receive immediate feedback and a short explanation.
1. The Supreme Court of India was inaugurated in:
2. Which Article establishes the Supreme Court?
3. The Supreme Court is covered under which Part of the Constitution?
4. Supreme Court judges are formally appointed by:
5. What minimum age does Article 124 prescribe for Supreme Court appointment?
6. The retirement age of Supreme Court judges is:
7. The collegium system principally evolved through:
8. The NJAC framework was invalidated in:
9. Removal of a Supreme Court judge requires:
10. The constitutional grounds for removal are:
11. Exclusive original jurisdiction over specified federal disputes is under:
12. Article 32 concerns:
13. Which writ addresses unlawful detention?
14. Which writ tests legal entitlement to public office?
15. Which writ restrains a lower court from exceeding jurisdiction?
16. High Courts have wider writ subject-matter jurisdiction under:
17. Special leave to appeal is provided under:
18. Advisory jurisdiction is provided by:
19. The Supreme Court is a Court of Record under:
20. Review of Supreme Court judgments is provided by:
21. Supreme Court law is binding on all courts under:
22. The power to do complete justice is associated with:
23. A Constitution Bench under Article 145(3) requires at least:
24. The Basic Structure doctrine was established in:
25. Which statement is constitutionally sound?
Mains Answer-Writing Practice
Question 1
Explain the constitutional safeguards that ensure the independence of the Supreme Court of India.
Show model answer framework
Introduction: Judicial independence is essential for constitutional supremacy, rule of law and rights protection.
Main Points:
- Secure tenure and difficult removal procedure.
- Protected salaries and service conditions.
- Specified expenditure charged on the Consolidated Fund of India.
- Restrictions on parliamentary discussion of judicial conduct.
- Contempt and institutional powers.
- Constitutional jurisdiction and judicial review.
Conclusion: Independence supports impartial justice and should coexist with accountability.
Question 2
Critically examine the collegium system of judicial appointments in India.
Show model answer framework
Introduction: The collegium system evolved through judicial interpretation of constitutional appointment provisions.
Development: First Judges Case (1981), Second Judges Case (1993), Third Judges Case (1998) and NJAC judgment (2015).
Merits:
- Supports judicial independence.
- Limits direct political influence.
- Uses institutional judicial expertise.
Criticisms:
- Transparency concerns.
- Questions regarding diversity.
- Appointment delays.
- Limited formal external participation.
Way Forward: Clear criteria, reasoned recommendations, timely appointments and transparency.
Conclusion: Reform should strengthen accountability without compromising independence.
Question 3
Discuss the significance of judicial review in maintaining constitutional supremacy and protecting the Basic Structure.
Show model answer framework
Introduction: Judicial review permits constitutional examination of legislation and executive action.
Significance:
- Protects Fundamental Rights.
- Maintains federal balance.
- Limits arbitrary public power.
- Preserves constitutional supremacy.
Basic Structure: Kesavananda Bharati established limits on Parliament’s amending power.
Challenges: Judicial activism, institutional boundaries and democratic accountability.
Conclusion: Judicial review is essential but should be exercised through principled reasoning.
Question 4
Distinguish between Articles 32 and 226 with reference to writ jurisdiction.
Show model answer framework
Introduction: Both Articles provide constitutional remedies.
Article 32: Direct access to the Supreme Court for enforcement of Fundamental Rights. It is itself a Fundamental Right.
Article 226: High Courts may issue writs for Fundamental Rights and other legal purposes.
Difference: Article 226 has wider subject-matter scope, subject to territorial and legal limitations.
Conclusion: Together, they strengthen access to constitutional justice.
Question 5
Judicial activism has strengthened rights protection but raises questions about separation of powers. Examine.
Show model answer framework
Introduction: Judicial activism involves an assertive approach to constitutional adjudication.
Contributions:
- Expanded rights protection.
- Greater access through PIL.
- Remedies against executive inaction.
- Development of constitutional jurisprudence.
Concerns:
- Possible institutional overreach.
- Limited judicial administrative expertise.
- Democratic accountability concerns.
- Implementation difficulties.
Way Forward: Institutional restraint, proportionate remedies and constitutional reasoning.
Conclusion: Judicial intervention should enforce constitutional duties without unnecessarily replacing democratic policy-making.
