Supreme Court of India: Jurisdiction, Powers and Functions

Introduction

The Supreme Court of India is the highest court in the country and the final authority on the interpretation of the Constitution. Its jurisdiction includes protecting fundamental rights, deciding disputes between governments, hearing appeals, reviewing its own judgments and advising the President on important legal questions. The Constitution grants these powers mainly through Articles 32, 129, 131–143 and other related provisions.

Meaning of Jurisdiction, Powers and Functions

Jurisdiction means the legal authority of a court to hear and decide a case. The Supreme Court exercises different types of jurisdiction depending on the nature of the dispute and the constitutional provision involved.

Powers are the legal abilities given to the Court to perform its duties, such as issuing writs, reviewing judgments and punishing contempt of court.

Functions are the purposes the Court serves, including protecting fundamental rights, interpreting the Constitution, resolving disputes and ensuring that government authorities act within the law.

The Supreme Court's jurisdiction is broad, but it is not unlimited. The Constitution and laws made under it determine when and how the Court may exercise its powers.

Enforcement of Fundamental Rights under Article 32

Meaning and importance

Article 32 guarantees the right to approach the Supreme Court for the enforcement of fundamental rights contained in Part III of the Constitution.

Fundamental rights include the right to equality, freedom of speech and expression, protection of life and personal liberty, freedom of religion and other rights guaranteed by the Constitution.

Article 32 is itself a fundamental right. Therefore, a person whose fundamental rights are violated can approach the Supreme Court for an appropriate remedy.

Dr. B. R. Ambedkar described Article 32 as the Constitution's heart and soul because fundamental rights would lose much of their practical value without an effective remedy for their enforcement.

Powers under Article 32

Under Article 32(2), the Supreme Court may issue directions, orders or writs to enforce fundamental rights. These remedies may help prevent a violation or provide relief after a violation has occurred.

The five principal writs are:

Habeas Corpus

Meaning: "Produce the person."

This writ protects a person against unlawful detention. The Court may direct the authority holding the person to produce them before the Court and justify the detention.

Mandamus

Meaning: "We command."

This writ directs a public authority to perform a legal duty that it has failed or refused to perform.

Prohibition

This writ directs a lower court or tribunal to stop proceedings when it acts beyond its legal authority or otherwise violates the limits of its jurisdiction.

Certiorari

This writ allows a higher court to quash (cancel) an order of a lower court or tribunal when recognised legal grounds exist, such as lack of jurisdiction or a serious legal error.

Quo Warranto

Meaning: "By what authority?"

This writ questions the legal authority under which a person holds a public office. It may be issued when the person does not satisfy the legal requirements for holding that office.

Compensation for violation of fundamental rights

In appropriate cases, the Supreme Court may award compensation when State action violates fundamental rights, particularly the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21.

This remedy is different from an ordinary claim for damages in a civil court. It is used in suitable cases to provide public law relief for serious violations of constitutional rights.

Article 32 and Article 226

Article 32 empowers the Supreme Court to enforce fundamental rights. Article 226 empowers High Courts to issue writs for enforcing fundamental rights and for other legal purposes as well.

Therefore, the High Courts have a wider range of purposes for which they may issue writs, while the Supreme Court's jurisdiction under Article 32 is specifically directed towards fundamental rights.

Supreme Court as a Court of Record under Article 129

Meaning of a court of record

Article 129 declares the Supreme Court to be a court of record. A court of record preserves its judicial records as permanent records with legal authority.

Article 129 also gives the Supreme Court the power to punish for contempt of itself.

Contempt of court means conduct that seriously interferes with the administration of justice or disobeys lawful court authority in circumstances recognised by law.

Power to punish for contempt

The contempt power protects the authority of the Court and helps ensure that judicial proceedings are not obstructed. It must be exercised carefully and within the limits of the law.

The Supreme Court's constitutional power under Article 129 cannot simply be taken away by ordinary legislation. However, the exercise of this power remains subject to constitutional principles and applicable law.

Important case law

Delhi Judicial Service Association v. State of Gujarat (1991)

The Supreme Court explained that its power as a court of record extends beyond contempt committed against the Supreme Court itself. It also extends to contempt of subordinate courts, helping protect the administration of justice throughout the country.

Supreme Court Bar Association v. Union of India (1998)

The Supreme Court held that its contempt jurisdiction does not give it unlimited power to suspend or cancel an advocate's licence to practise law as a professional disciplinary punishment. Such disciplinary action falls within the statutory framework governing advocates, including the Advocates Act, 1961. The Court distinguished its power to punish contempt from the powers of professional disciplinary bodies.

Original Jurisdiction under Article 131

Meaning of original jurisdiction

Original jurisdiction means the authority of a court to hear a case at the first instance rather than as an appeal from another court.

Article 131 gives the Supreme Court original and exclusive jurisdiction over specified disputes involving the Union Government and State Governments.

Exclusive jurisdiction means that, for disputes falling within Article 131, the Supreme Court has authority to hear the matter to the exclusion of other courts.

Disputes covered by Article 131

The Supreme Court may hear disputes:

• Between the Government of India and one or more States.
• Between the Government of India and one or more States on one side, and one or more other States on the other side.
• 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.

Conditions for exercising original jurisdiction

The parties must fall within Article 131

The dispute must be between the governments or States specified in the Article. A private individual cannot use Article 131 to bring an ordinary claim against the Union Government or a State Government.

A dispute involving a government-owned company does not automatically qualify. The legal identity of the parties and the nature of the dispute must satisfy Article 131.

The dispute must concern a legal right

The dispute must involve the existence or extent of a legal right. A disagreement based only on political differences or other non-legal considerations is not sufficient.

Constitutional limitations

Article 131 contains a proviso excluding certain disputes arising from specified treaties, agreements, covenants or similar instruments that continued after the Constitution commenced, or that expressly exclude this jurisdiction.

The Constitution and laws made under it also provide for certain exclusions. For example, Parliament may restrict the Supreme Court's jurisdiction over specified inter-State river water disputes under Article 262.

Important case law

State of Bihar v. Union of India (1970)

The Supreme Court considered the limits of Article 131 in a dispute involving the State of Bihar and Hindustan Steel Ltd. The case illustrates that the original jurisdiction under Article 131 depends on the identity of the parties and the constitutional requirements, not merely on the involvement of a government or a public-sector company.

Appellate Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court

Meaning of appellate jurisdiction

Appellate jurisdiction is the authority to examine a decision made by a lower court. The Supreme Court hears appeals in constitutional, civil and criminal matters under specific constitutional provisions.

The right to appeal to the Supreme Court is not automatic in every case. The relevant constitutional conditions must be satisfied, or the Court must grant special leave where applicable.

Appeals involving constitutional interpretation under Article 132

Article 132 permits an appeal to the Supreme Court from a judgment, decree or final order of a High Court in civil, criminal or other proceedings when the High Court certifies under Article 134A that the case involves a substantial question of law concerning the interpretation of the Constitution.

A substantial question of law is an important legal question that requires authoritative determination, rather than a mere disagreement about facts.

Where the certificate is granted, a party to the case may appeal on the ground that the constitutional question was wrongly decided.

Appeals in civil matters under Article 133

Article 133 governs civil appeals from High Courts to the Supreme Court.

An appeal may be made when the High Court certifies under Article 134A:

• That the case involves a substantial question of law of general importance; and
• That the question needs to be decided by the Supreme Court.

Article 133 also permits a party to raise a substantial question concerning constitutional interpretation as a ground of appeal where its requirements are met.

Unless Parliament provides otherwise by law, an appeal does not lie under Article 133 from the judgment, decree or final order of a single judge of a High Court.

Appeals in criminal matters under Article 134

Article 134 provides for appeals to the Supreme Court in specified criminal cases.

An appeal lies in the following circumstances:

• The High Court reverses an acquittal on appeal and sentences the accused person to death.
• The High Court withdraws a case from a subordinate court, tries the accused itself, convicts the accused and sentences them to death.
• The High Court certifies under Article 134A that the case is fit for appeal to the Supreme Court.

Article 134(2) also allows Parliament to expand the Supreme Court's criminal appellate jurisdiction by law, subject to conditions and limitations.

The Supreme Court (Enlargement of Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction) Act, 1970 expanded criminal appeals in specified circumstances involving serious sentences, including life imprisonment and imprisonment for at least ten years.

Special leave to appeal under Article 136

Article 136 gives the Supreme Court discretionary power to grant special leave to appeal against a judgment, decree, determination, sentence or order made by a court or tribunal in India.

Special leave means permission granted by the Supreme Court to appeal, even where an ordinary appeal is not available as of right.

The Court may consider granting special leave in cases involving serious injustice, a substantial legal error, a serious failure to follow fair procedure or an exercise of power without legal authority.

However, Article 136 does not create an automatic right of appeal. The Supreme Court decides whether the circumstances justify its intervention.

Article 136 does not apply to courts or tribunals constituted under laws relating to the Armed Forces.

Review Jurisdiction under Article 137

Meaning of review

Review jurisdiction allows the Supreme Court to reconsider its own judgment or order in accordance with the Constitution, applicable laws and rules made under Article 145.

The general principle is that court decisions should achieve finality. However, a limited power of review is necessary to prevent serious injustice in appropriate cases.

Grounds for review

A review petition may be considered on recognised grounds, including:

• Discovery of important new evidence or material that could not reasonably have been presented earlier.
• An error apparent on the face of the record (a clear mistake visible from the decision or case record).
• Any other sufficient reason recognised by the applicable legal principles.

A review petition is not an opportunity to argue the entire case again simply because a party disagrees with the judgment.

The Supreme Court's review power is exercised within the limits set by its rules and established legal principles.

Power to Do Complete Justice under Article 142

Meaning and scope

Article 142 empowers the Supreme Court to pass any decree or make any order necessary to do complete justice in a case or matter pending before it.

This power allows the Court to provide effective relief when ordinary legal remedies may not be sufficient to resolve the dispute fairly. Orders passed under Article 142 are enforceable throughout India.

Examples of the use of Article 142

The Supreme Court may use Article 142, where legally appropriate, to:

• Direct compensation for serious violations of rights.
• Issue directions necessary to resolve a dispute fully.
• Make procedural or other orders required to ensure effective justice.
• Secure the attendance of persons or the production of documents, subject to Article 142(2) and applicable law.

Limitations on Article 142

Article 142 is a powerful constitutional provision, but it is not unlimited. It cannot be treated as a general authority to disregard substantive law (the legal rules that determine rights and duties) or constitutional provisions.

The power must be exercised consistently with the Constitution and the legal principles governing the case.

Advisory Jurisdiction under Article 143

Meaning of advisory jurisdiction

Advisory jurisdiction allows the Supreme Court to give its opinion on certain legal or factual questions referred to it by the President of India.

Unlike ordinary judicial proceedings, this jurisdiction may be invoked without a conventional dispute being brought before the Court by opposing parties.

Reference by the President

Under Article 143(1), the President may refer a question of law or fact to the Supreme Court when:

• The question has arisen or is likely to arise.
• It is of such a nature and public importance that obtaining the Court's opinion is considered appropriate.

The Supreme Court considers the reference and reports its opinion to the President after such hearing as it considers suitable. The Court may decline to answer a reference in appropriate circumstances.

References concerning excluded disputes

Under Article 143(2), the President may refer certain disputes of the kind described in the proviso to Article 131 to the Supreme Court for its opinion.

This provision allows the Court to consider specified disputes even though they fall within the exclusion described in Article 131.

Is the advisory opinion binding?

An advisory opinion under Article 143 is not binding on the President in the same way that a judgment resolving an ordinary case binds the parties. However, the opinion carries significant constitutional and legal authority.

Importance of advisory jurisdiction

Advisory jurisdiction helps the government obtain authoritative legal guidance on questions of public importance before taking further action. It may assist in clarifying constitutional issues and avoiding disputes.

Other Important Powers and Functions

Binding nature of Supreme Court decisions under Article 141

Article 141 provides that the law declared by the Supreme Court is binding on all courts within the territory of India.

This principle promotes consistency in the interpretation and application of law. Lower courts must follow the legal principles laid down by the Supreme Court in relevant cases.

However, the binding force lies in the law declared by the Court, not necessarily every observation made in a judgment.

Power to regulate its procedure under Article 145

Article 145 empowers the Supreme Court to make rules regulating its practice and procedure, subject to the Constitution and applicable law.

These rules govern matters such as filing cases, presenting arguments and conducting hearings.

Power to transfer certain cases under Article 139A

Article 139A empowers the Supreme Court to transfer certain cases involving the same or substantially similar substantial questions of law of general importance from High Courts to itself. It may decide the questions and return the cases to the relevant High Courts with its judgment.

The Supreme Court may also transfer a case, appeal or other proceeding from one High Court to another High Court or from a subordinate court to another subordinate court, where the constitutional requirements are satisfied.

Power to appoint additional judges for sittings under Article 127

Article 127 provides for the appointment of ad hoc judges when the required quorum of Supreme Court judges is unavailable to hold or continue a sitting. The procedure involves the Chief Justice of India, the consent of the President and consultation with the Chief Justice of the High Court concerned, as prescribed by the Constitution.

This provision helps the Court continue its work when the necessary number of judges is not available.

Important Case Law

L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India (1997)

The Supreme Court held that the power of judicial review exercised by the Supreme Court under Article 32 and by High Courts under Article 226 is part of the Constitution's basic structure. Decisions of tribunals remain subject to scrutiny by the relevant High Courts under the constitutional framework.

This case reinforces the role of constitutional courts in protecting fundamental rights and ensuring that public authorities act lawfully.

Delhi Judicial Service Association v. State of Gujarat (1991)

The Supreme Court explained the scope of its power under Article 129 as a court of record. Its contempt jurisdiction extends to protecting subordinate courts as well as the Supreme Court itself.

The decision highlights the importance of protecting the administration of justice from improper interference.

Supreme Court Bar Association v. Union of India (1998)

The Court held that its contempt jurisdiction does not automatically allow it to suspend an advocate's professional licence as a disciplinary punishment. Professional disciplinary action must follow the relevant statutory framework.

The case illustrates that even broad constitutional powers must be exercised within their proper legal limits.

Kamlesh Verma v. Mayawati (2013)

The Supreme Court explained the principles governing review petitions. Review is permitted only on limited grounds, such as an apparent error or other sufficient reason recognised by law. It cannot be used simply to rehear a case or replace one possible view with another.

The decision clarifies the limited nature of the Court's review jurisdiction under Article 137.

Distinction Between the Main Types of Jurisdiction

Practical Example

Suppose a State Government passes an order that unlawfully restricts a person's fundamental right to life and personal liberty.

The affected person may approach the Supreme Court under Article 32 and seek an appropriate writ or other order. If the Court finds a constitutional violation, it may direct the authority to correct the violation and, in a suitable case, award compensation.

If the dispute instead concerns a legal disagreement between two State Governments over their constitutional rights, Article 131 may provide the appropriate route.

If a High Court has already decided a civil or criminal case, an appeal may be possible under the relevant constitutional provisions. Where no ordinary appeal is available, a party may seek special leave under Article 136, although the Supreme Court is not required to grant it.

These examples show that the appropriate jurisdiction depends on the nature of the dispute, the parties involved and the constitutional conditions that apply.

Summary

• The Supreme Court is the highest judicial authority in India, with powers granted by the Constitution.
• Article 32 guarantees the right to approach the Supreme Court for the enforcement of fundamental rights.
• Article 129 makes the Supreme Court a court of record and gives it the power to punish contempt.
• Article 131 provides original and exclusive jurisdiction over specified legal disputes between the Union and States or between States.
• Articles 132, 133 and 134 govern appeals in constitutional, civil and criminal matters.
• Article 136 gives the Supreme Court discretionary power to grant special leave to appeal.
• Article 137 allows the Court to review its own judgments and orders on limited grounds.
• Article 142 empowers the Court to make orders necessary to do complete justice in matters before it.
• Article 143 allows the President to seek the Court's opinion on questions of law or fact of public importance.
• Article 141 makes the law declared by the Supreme Court binding on all courts in India.
• The Supreme Court's powers are broad, but they must be exercised within the limits of the Constitution and applicable law.